Kerala High Court
Peruvanam Chira Patasekhara Ela vs Cherpu Grama Panchayath on 4 April, 2022
Author: K. Babu
Bench: K. Babu
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. BABU
Monday, the 4th day of April 2022 / 14th Chaithra, 1944
IA.NO.1/2022 IN RSA NO. 1401 OF 2010
AS 41/2008 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT (ADHOC)FAST TRACK-I, THRISSUR
OS 2882/2003 OF II ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF COURT ,THRISSUR
APPLICANTS/RESPONDENTS NOS.3,5,6 AND 10 TO 14 IN RSA:
1. AJAYAKUMAR, S/O.THOTTIPARAMBIL MANIKUTTY, POOCHINNIPADAM DESOM, OORAKAM
VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK,THRISSUR DISTRICT,PIN-680 562.
2. VIJAYAN, S/O.KUZHICHAMADAM VELAYUDHAN, POOCHINNIPADAM DESOM, OORAKAM VILLAGE,
THRISSUR TALUK,THRISSUR DISTRICT,PIN-680 562.
3. BALAKRISHNAN, S/O.CHIRAMMEL MAMAN POOCHINNIPADAM DESOM, OORAKAM VILLAGE,
THRISSUR TALUK,THRISSUR DISTRICT,PIN-680 562.
4. GOVINDANKUTTY, S/O.MYMPILLY NARAYANAN PERUMBILLISSERY DESOM, CHEVOOR
VILLAGE,THRISSUR TALUK,THRISSUR DISTRICT,PIN-680 562.
5. MADHUSUDHANAN, S/O.THEVARAKULAM SHANMUGHAN, PERUMBILLISSERY DESOM, CHEVOOR
VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK,THRISSUR DISTRICT,PIN-680 562.
6. MOHANAN, S/O.THEVARKULAM BALAN PERUMBILLISSERY DESOM, CHEVOOR VILLAGE,,
THRISSUR TALUK.
7. MOHANAN, S/O.SANKARA KURUP VALLACHIRA VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK,THRISSUR
DISTRICT,PIN-680 562.
8. APPU, S/O.ALEKKAT AYYAPPAN VALLACHIRA VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK,THRISSUR
DISTRICT,PIN-680 562.
RESPONDENTS -APPELLANTS AND RESPONDENTS NO.1,4,7 TO 9 AND 15 IN RSA:
1. PERUVANAM CHIRA PATASEKHARA ELA NELLULPADAKA SAMOOHAM, PERUVANAM,, OORAKAM
VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK,THRISSUR DISTRICT,PIN-680 562.
2. PRESIDENT, PERUVANAM CHIRA PATASEKHARA ELA NELLULPADAKA SAMOOHAM,
PERUVANAM, OORAKAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK,THRISSUR DISTRICT,PIN-680 562..
3. CHERPU GRAMA PANCHAYATH,THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRESIDENT,CHERPPU,THRISSUR DISTRICT,PIN-680 562.
4. M.AJAYAN, S/O.E.KRISHNA PILLAI, GIRIJANIVAS, PERUVANAM DESOM, OORAKAM
VILLAGE,THRISSUR TALUK,THRISSUR DISTRICT,PIN-680 562.
5. T.UNNIKRISHNAN, S/O.THEKKEKURUPPATH NARAYANAN NAIR, PERUVANAM DESOM, OORAKAM
VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK,THRISSUR DISTRICT,PIN-680 562.
6. SREEKALA REGHU, S/O.MADASSERY MOHANAN, PERUVANAM DESOM, OORAKAM VILLAGE,
THRISSUR TALUK,THRISSUR DISTRICT,PIN-680 562.
7. MOHAN, S/O.EDATHIRUTHIKKARAN JOSE, CHERPU VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK,THRISSUR
DISTRICT,PIN-680 562.
8. KERALA SASTHRA SAHITHYA PARISHATH CHERPU, REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE
COMMITTEE, THRITHAMARASSERY VARIATH SANKARAN,THRISSUR DISTRICT,PIN-680 562.
Application praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith the High
Court be pleased to direct the Appellants in the above Regular Second Appeal to commence the
paddy cultivation diligently without waste of any time from the date of opening of the sluice, at any
rate before 10th May by sowing of paddy in the property scheduled to the plaint in OS.NO.2882 of
2003 on the file of the Additional Munsiff's Court-II,Thrissur, pending disposal of the above Regular
Second Appeal.
This Application coming on for orders upon perusing the application and the affidavit filed in
support thereof, and upon hearing the arguments of SRI.S.V.BALAKRISHNA IYER, Senior Advocate
along with M/S.P.B.KRISHNAN, NEELAKANDAN P.M., SABU GEORGE, P.B.SUBRAMANYAN, Advocates
for the petitioners in IA/R3,5,6 and 10 to 14 in RSA and of SRI. RENJITH THAMBAN,Senior Advocate
along wih SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR, Advocates for R1 and R2 in IA/Appellants in RSA and of
SRI.R.SREEHARI, SRI.SACHIN VYAS, Advocates for R3 in IA/R1 in RSA, the court passed the following:
K.BABU, J.
------------------------------------
I.A.No.1 of 2022
in
R.S.A No.1401 of 2010
------------------------------------
Dated this the 4th day of April, 2022
ORDER
Heard Sri.S.V.Balakrishna Iyer, the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners/respondents and Sri.Renjith Thamban, the learned Senior counsel for the respondents/appellants.
2. On 07.04.2015, this Court had passed the following interim order:-
"Appellant society is the petitioner in IA No.854/2015. The second appeal arises out of a suit for permanent prohibitory Injunction restraining the first respondent from constructing a bund and collecting water in the paddy field (plaint schedule Property) and also for realization of damages. The appellant Society claims that it has been registered under the Travancore Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act. As per the contentions of the petitioner, the first respondent Panchayath has absolutely no right in the plaint schedule Property. It is also contended that the Panchayath has no right to construct a bund and prevent flow of water collected in the Paddy field. The members of the appellant society are engaged in group farming. Seeds could be sown only after preparing the field. It can be done only after the field is completely dried. Only if the sluice in the bund is opened, water will drain out and the field will become dry. It is the contention of the petitioners that after the field is dried up, it will be ploughed and after fifteen days, it will be again ploughed, depending on the presence of rain. After removing the waste materials, seeds will be sworn. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the respondents unjustly refrain from opening the sluice so as to drain out water and to take steps for paddy cultivation. Hence every year they are compelled to approach this Court for getting orders directing the respondents to open the sluice for draining out water in order to enable paddy cultivation.
2. Respondent No.6 filed a counter affidavit on his behalf and on behalf of other contesting I.A.No.1/2022 in RSA No.1401/2010 2 respondents. According to the respondents, the petition is premature. Unless water is collected in the paddy field, the ponds and wells existing in the areas of Cherpu and one Vallachira Panchayaths will not be filled up during monsoon. Around 5,000 people will be badly affected due to water scarcity, if the entire water is drained out. In the vicinity, lot of places of worship are also present. Therefore, water will have to be retained in the paddy field for a reasonable time to have sufficient water in the drinking sources in the locality.
3. Respondent in the above I. A filed another IA No.934/2015 seeking a direction that the petitioner/appellant be directed to complete the raising of crops between April 2015 and end of August 2015. To this application, the petitioner/appellant filed a counter affidavit. It is their contention that no outer limit can be fixed for closing the bund as paddy cultivation can be done only after preparation of the paddy field depending upon the availability of rain. The seeds should be put in the paddy field for germination. According to the contentions raised by the petitioners in the counter affidavit, they are undertaking paddy cultivation as per the advise of the Agricultural Officer, Krishi Bhavan, Cherppu. Therefore, it may not be possible to fix any outer limit for completing the cultivation and it may vary from year to year.
4. Heard the learned Senior counsel Sri.M.C.Sen And Smt.Shahna Karthikeyan for the appellants and the learned Counsel SriT.M.Chandran, Sri.V.A.Sasidharan and Sri.Joseph Albin Nedunthally for the respondents.
5. I have been taken through the orders passed By this Court during the previous years. This Court on IA No.1056/2012 on 4th April, 2012 considered the same issue and passed an order. The operative portion of the order reads as Follows:
"This application is allowed. First Respondent is directed to open the sluice on the bund by 10.04.2012 for de-watering the suit properties and remove all obstructions for free flow of water from the suit properties affecting the process of de- Watering. The sluice shall not be closed until 31-08-2012. Petitioner shall not delay cultivation in the suit properties."
6. Thereafter, on 27th March, 2013, this Court on I.A No.989/2013 passed the following order on an identical petition :
" Though there is stiff opposition from the respondents, in view of the orders passed earlier, this petition is allowed directing the first respondent to open I.A.No.1/2022 in RSA No.1401/2010 3 the sluice and thereby remove the obstruction in the bund on or before 10.04.2013. It will remain as such till the crops are harvested."
7. Later, the said order was clarified to the effect that the sluice will remain open till 15-09-2013. Thereafter, as per order on I.A No.992/2014, this Court on 3rd April, 2014 directed the first respondent to open the sluice and remove the obstruction for opening the bund on or before 10-04-2014. It was also directed that the sluice will remain open till the crops are harvested.
8. Learned counsel appearing for the Panchayath And the contesting respondents contended that if no time limit is fixed for closing the bund, the petitioners are likely to delay the paddy cultivation and thereby the entire water collected in the field will flow out causing scarcity of water in the area. In answer to this argument, learned Senior Counsel submitted that no farmer will allow his crops to remain in the paddy field after it is ripe for harvest. It is to be borne in mind that in the matter of paddy cultivation there are lot of imponderables like favourable weather, adequate rain, good quality of seed, absence Of menace by the pests etc. So it may not be possible for anyone to say with mathematical precision as to when the crops can be raised and on what date it can be harvested. Considering the reasonable period to be spent from sowing the seed to the harvest, it can only be held that it may take 3 to 4 months. Learned Senior counsel submitted that fixation of any time for closing the bund may work out difficulties to the paddy cultivators. Both sides agree that there need not be orders passed in this matter every year an this order can be taken as an interim arrangement till the disposal of the appeal.
Considering all the facts and circumstances, the following directions are issued:
The respondent Panchayath shall open the sluice on 10th April, 2015 and thereafter every year on the same date until the appeal is disposed of. The petitioners shall take all steps to do the paddy cultivation diligently without waste of any time. They shall raise the crops and make all endeavour to harvest the crop before 30th September of every year. In case the petitioners are not able to complete the harvesting before that day, they are at liberty to approach this Court for seeking extension of time stating the reasons therefore."
2. The learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants made an undertaking that the appellants will make I.A.No.1/2022 in RSA No.1401/2010 4 earnest efforts to comply with the directions in the order dated 07.04.2015.
This undertaking is recorded. The parties are at liberty to approach this Court for necessary clarifications.
Sd/-
K.BABU JUDGE VPK 04-04-2022 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar