IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S.

FRIDAY, THE 2^ND DAY OF AUGUST 2024 / 11TH SRAVANA, 1946 OP(C) NO. 274 OF 2020 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN OS NO.1385 OF 1995 OF I ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF COURT,ERNAKULAM PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS:

1 T.S. SIDHARTHAN, (DIED)

AGED 71 YEARS S/O.SHANKU,RESIDING AT CHAITHANYA, CHUTTUPADUKARA, EDAPPALLY NORTH VILLAGE PIN-682024 2 SANTHA SIDHARTHAN W/O. LATE SIDHARTHAN, AGED 80 CHAITHANYA, CHANDRATHIL ROAD, EDAPPALLY P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682024 KERALA

3 ANURADHA RAJEENDRAN D/O LATE TS SIDHARTHAN AGED 57, 91 CHUNGATH HOUSE CHANDRATHIL ROAD, EDAPPALLY PO ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-

682024 KERALA

4 RAJESH MOHAN S/O LATE T S SIDHARTHAN AGED 54 CHAITHANYA CHANDRATHIL ROAD, EDAPPALLY PO ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682024 KERALA

5 RAMESH MOHAN S/O LATE T S SIDHARTHAN AGED 52 CHAITHANYA CHANDRATHIL ROAD, EDAPPALLY PO ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682024 KERALA (THE LEGAL HEIRS OF THE DECEASED PETITIONERS ARE IMPLEADED AS ADDL PETITIONERS 2 TO 5 AS PER ORDER DTD 18.10.2023 IN IA NO.1/2023.

BY ADVS.

K.V.JAYACHANDRAN RAJU V.MATHEW HARISHANKAR K.J.

RESPONDENT/PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF:

C.S.BHUVANACHANDRA MENON, AGED 59 YEARS,S/O.P.S.SIVASANKARAN MENON,CHITTETH MADAM,THRIKKAKARA,B.M.C.P.O.,VAZHAKALA VILLAGE, PIN - 682

021.

BY ADVS.

SRI.K.C.CHARLES SRI.M.POLY MATHAI SRI.VIMAL K.CHARLES THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.08.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

EASWARAN S., J.

========================

O.P.(C) No. 274 of 2020 ========================

Dated this the 2^nd day of August, 2024

JUDGMENT

A suit for prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from trespassing into the plaint schedule property instituted in the year 1995 has still not yet attained its finality because of the repeated litigations between the parties. Initially, the suit was dismissed by the Trial Court by judgment and decree dated 14.01.2002. It is also to be noted that the defendant had also filed a counter claim against the plaintiff in the suit. Aggrieved by the dismissal of both suit and counter claim, A.S.No.123/2002 was filed before the Sub Court and A.S.No.125/2002 filed by the defendant. However, A.S.No.123/2002 was allowed and A.S.No.125/2002 was dismissed. As against decree and judgment, R.S.A No.1071/2007 was filed before this Court by the plaintiff. This Court, by Ext.P1 judgment dated 27.06.2019, allowed the appeal and remanded the matter for further consideration by the Trial Court with liberty to both the plaintiff and the defendant to amend the respective pleadings and also counter claim and to issue a survey commission to locate and identify the properties claimed by the parties. On remand, the plaintiff filed I.A. No.5890/2019 and O.S. No.1385/1995. The defendant objected to the same as Ext.P3. The objection was overruled, and the application was allowed and, an Advocate Commission was appointed. This was by Ext.P4 order dated 19.11.2019. The operating provisions of the Ext.P4 order reads as follows:-

2.Heard both sides.

3.Perused the rival pleadings as well as the Order of the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in RSA.1071/2007. The survey report and plan are highly inevitable for the final disposal of the Lis. The work memo of the respondent can be permitted to address the grievance of the respondent.

So, the I.A. is allowed as follows:

Adv.Sumitha K.S. is appointed as the Survey Commission. The Taluk Surveyor is appointed as the Surveyor to assist the commissioner. Commission Batta Rs.4500/-. Surveyor Batta Rs.2500/- Pay Batta. For Commission report and Plan.

Call on 18-12-2019.

2. I have heard Sri.K.V.Jayachandran - learned counsel appearing for petitioners and Sri.K.C.Charles – learned counsel appearing for respondent/plaintiff. The learned counsel for the petitioners pointed out that after the remand, Ext.P2 application filed for appointment of the Advocate Commissioner shows that in respect of S.L. No.2 and 3, the plaintiff had sought inspection and re