Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Kunjumon vs St.Mary Jacobite Syrian Chappel on 21 August, 2014

Author: V.Chitambaresh

Bench: V.Chitambaresh

       

  

  

 
 
                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                    PRESENT:

                 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH

        THURSDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST 2014/30TH SRAVANA, 1936

                           OP(C).No. 1445 of 2014 (O)
                             ---------------------------
  I.A.NO.2904/2013 IN OS.NO.218/2013 OF MUNSIFF COURT, PERUMBAVOOR.

PETITIONER(S):
-----------------

       1. KUNJUMON, AGED 56 YEARS
           S/O.CHOLLAN, THERODATHIMALAYIL HOUSE, MUDAKKUZHA KARA
           VENGOOR WEST VILLAGE, PERUMBAVOOR

       2. RADHAKRISHNAN, AGED 55 YEARS
          S/O.NARAYANAN NAIR, KAVISSERY HOUSE, ALIMURY KARA
          KOOVAPPADY VILLAGE, PERUMBAVOOR

         BY ADVS.SRI.S.RENJITH
                     SRI.K.O.SANTHOSH
                     SRI.GEORGE MATHEW (ONATTUPARAMBIL)

RESPONDENT(S):
------------------

       1. ST.MARY JACOBITE SYRIAN CHAPPEL
          AIMURY KARA, VENGOOR WEST VILLAGE, REP BY TRUSTEE
          OUSEPH, S/O.PAILY, KARIPPAPPAKKADAN HOUSE
          MUDAKKUZHA KARA, PERUMBAVOOR
          ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 683544

       2. ST.MARY JACOBITE SYRIAN CHAPPEL,
          AIMURY KARA, VENGOOR WEST VILLAGE
          REP BY TRUSTEE MATHAI, S/O.MATHAI
          KAJIRATHINAKAL HOUSE, MUDAKKUZHA KARA, PERUMBAVOOR
          ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 683544

       3. ST.MARY JACOBITE SYRIAN CHAPPEL
          AIMURY KARA, VENGOOR WEST VILLAGE
          REP. BY TRUSTEE, MATHAI, S/O.MATHAI
          KAJIRATHINKAL HOUSE, MUDAKKUZHA KARA
          PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 683 544.

       3. KOOVAPPADY GRAMA PANCHAYATH
           REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, KOOVAPPADY P.O
          PERUMBAVOOR 683544

         R4 BY ADV. SRI.R.RANJITH,SC,KOOVAPPADY GRAMA PANCH
         R1 BY ADV. SRI.N.SUKUMARAN (SR.)
         R1 BY ADV. SRI.S.SHYAM
         R1 BY ADV. SRI.A.C.CHACKO

         THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-08-2014,
         THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                             OP(C).No. 1445 of 2014 (O)
                              ---------------------------

                                     APPENDIX

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
----------------------------

EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S NO 218 OF 2013 OF THE MUNSIFF
               COURT,PERUMBAVOOR

EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT IN O.S NO 218 OF 2013 OF THE
               MUNSIFF COUR,PERUMBAVOOR

EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE IA NO 2904 OF 2013 FILED BY THE PETITIOENRS
               BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT,PERUMBAVOOR

EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PLAINTIFF IN I.A NO 2904 OF
               2013

EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF THE ORDER OF HON'BLE MUNSIFF COURT,PERUMBAVOOR
               IN I.A NO 2904 OF 2013 IN OS NO 218 OF 2013

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL.
------------------------------




                                            //TRUE COPY//




                                                    P.S. TO JUDGE.



                   V.CHITAMBARESH, J.
                  ---------------------
                O.P (C) No.1445 of 2014
                  ---------------------
        Dated this the 21st day of August, 2014


                    J U D G M E N T

There is admittedly a well in the plaint schedule property in O.S.No.218/2013 on the file of the court of the Munsiff of Perumbavoor. The suit is one for declaration of title and for injunction against the 4th respondent Grama Panchayat. One of the issues that arise in the suit is as to whether the well is vested in the Panchayat or not. The petitioners assert that they have been using the water in the well which according to them belongs to the Panchayat. The right if any of the petitioners to use water from the well would be dependent on the verdict in the suit.

2. The petitioners are undoubtedly proper parties to the suit if not necessary parties. The court below has not exercised the jurisdiction vested in it under Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure properly. The impugned order is set aside and I.A.No.2904/2013 in O.S.No.218/2013 is allowed. The petitioners shall be afforded an opportunity to file a written statement and the court below shall OP (C) No.1445 of 2014 2 proceed with the suit in accordance with law.

The Original Petition is allowed as above.

Sd/-

V.CHITAMBARESH, Judge.

nj.