J U D G M E N T

Antony Dominic, J.

The 8th respondent in W.P.(C) No.9603 of 2005 is the appellant. W.P.(C) No.9603 of 2005 was filed by the 1st respondent Panchayat, complaining mainly that despite Ext.P1 judgment and Ext.P2 decree in O.S. No.721 of 1998 rendered by the Principal Munsiff's Court, Neyyattinkara, orders were being passed by the 4th respondent altering the boundaries of the property comprised in Survey Nos.202/7A and 203/1 of Keezhavoor Village, Neyyattinkara Taluk.

2. In the judgment under appeal, the learned Single Judge accepted that having regard to the finality attained by Exts.P1 and P2 and in view of the provisions of Section 13 of the Survey and Boundaries Act , all proceedings pursuant to Ext.P4 are illegal and without jurisdiction. It is this judgment, which is under challenge at the instance of the 8th respondent in the writ petition.

3. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the counsel for the respective respondents.

W.A. No.1522 of 2009

4. From the facts it is clear that in relation to the aforesaid survey numbers, a re-survey was conducted and after notification, final plan was prepared on 30.12.1996. Alleging that the property did not contain