IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN THURSDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1932 RP.No. 389 OF 2010(J) AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.26139/2009 REVIEW PETITIONER/ NOT PARTY TO THE WRIT PETITION: NETTISSERY SIVA SASTHA KSHETRA KSHEMA SAMITHY, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT, SRI. RAJU ADIYAT, S/O. K.B. NAIR, RESIDING AT ADIYAT HOUSE, MUKATTUKARA (POST), NETTISERY VILLAGE, DESOM, THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR DT. BY ADV. SRI.THIYYANNOOR RAMAKRISHNAN SRI.ARUN KUMAR.P SMT.AMBIKA RADHAKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS IN THE WRIT PETITION: 1. SRI K.A. RAJAN, AGED 51, S/O. APPU, KOPPARA HOUSE, POST CHAVAKKAD, MANATHALA VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR. 2. COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, THRISSUR, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. COMMISSIONER, COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, THRISSUR. 4. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, THRISSUR. 5. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (L.C. UNIT), COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, THRISSUR. ADV. SRI.RAJIT FOR R1 SRI.K.GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP FOR R2 TO R5 THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S. GOPINATHAN, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = R.P. 389 OF 2010 IN W.P.(C) 26139 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = == == = = = = DATED THIS, THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2011. O R D E R C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J. This review petition is filed by the Kshetra Kshema Samithy stating that under the cover of the judgment, the first respondent proposes to construct compound wall including the temple pond, which is in a different sub division. 2. While disposing of the writ petition, we have only stated that the first respondent is entitled to protect his property by constructing compound wall around his property. However, since it was brought to our notice that a hundi was available in the vicinity near the first respondent's house, we stated that the hundi should not be covered by the compound wall. Our judgment certainly does not authorise the first respondent to construct compound wall including the Devaswom properties or temple pond, which he is not entitled to encroach upon under the cover of our order. Since there is apparently a dispute about the ownership of the property including the pond available in the vicinity, we direct the Special Tahsildar attached R.P. 389/2010 2 to the Cochin Devaswom Board to take the assistance of the local village officer, verify the title of the properties of the first respondent and identify the properties of the temple, demarcate the first respondent's properties and prepare a sketch based on which the first respondent is permitted to construct the compound wall. Relevant documents of title will be produced before the Special Tahsildar by the Devaswom and the review petitioner. The Tahsildar shall, based on the same, conduct an enquiry and permit construction of the compound wall. The review petition is disposed of as above. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, (JUDGE) P.S. GOPINATHAN, (JUDGE) knc/-