High Court Kerala High Court

George Lalu vs S.N.D.P.Sakhayogam-No.76 on 9 July, 2008

Kerala High Court
George Lalu vs S.N.D.P.Sakhayogam-No.76 on 9 July, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 20673 of 2008(J)


1. GEORGE LALU, AGED 48 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. ANNAMMA GEORGE, W/O.GEORGE,
3. ANNAMMA GEORGE, CHIRACKAL HOUSE,

                        Vs



1. S.N.D.P.SAKHAYOGAM-NO.760,
                       ...       Respondent

2. S.N.D.P.SAKHAYOGAM-NO.760,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

 Dated :09/07/2008

 O R D E R
                      M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.

                         -------------------------------

                         W.P.(C) No.20673 of 2008

                         -------------------------------

                        Dated this the 9th July, 2008.

                               J U D G M E N T

Petitioners are the plaintiffs in O.S.No.803 of 2006, on

the file of Munsiff Court, Alappuzha. The suit is for permanent

prohibitory injunction restraining respondents from encroaching into

plaint schedule Item No.3 pathway or putting up any structure

reducing the pathway. Petitioners filed I.A.No.197/2007, an

application for a mandatory direction to the respondent to remove the

constructions protruding into plaint schedule Item No.3 pathway.

Under Ext.P3 order, learned Munsiff dismissed the application. It is

challenged in this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of

India.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner was

heard.

On hearing the learned counsel, I do not find any

illegality or irregularity in the impugned order warranting interference

in exercise of the powers of this Court under Article 227 of the

W.P.(C) No.20673 of 2008

2

Constitution of India. Whether petitioners are entitled to a right of

way over plaint schedule Item NO.3 and whether they are entitled to

the mandatory injunction sought for are to be decided in the suit, on

the evidence to be recorded. In such circumstances, petition is

dismissed. Learned Munsiff is directed to dispose the suit

expeditiously untrammelled by the observations in Ext.P3 order.

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,
JUDGE

nj.