IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN FRIDAY, THE 24^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA, 1945 RSA NO. 530 OF 2021 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 31.10.2019 IN OS

623/2015 OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ALAPPUZHA JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 27.01.2021 IN AS 74/2019 AND CROSS OBJECTION OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT-II, ALAPPUZHA APPELLANTS/APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS:

1 JOSEPH JOHN, AGED 56 YEARS S/O. JOHN, ATTATHICHIRA HOUSE, THEKKEKKARA P.O, THEKKEKKARA MURI, CHAMBAKULAM VILLAGE, KUTTANAD TALUK, PIN CODE-688 503.

2 JOSEPH KOCHUPURA, AGED 63 YEARS, S/O. EANAS VALAYAM HOUSE, THEKKEKKARA P.O, THEKKEKKARA MURI, CHAMBAKULAM VILLAGE, KUTTANAD TALUK, PIN CODE-688 503.

3 THOMAS GEORGE, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O. GEORGE, PALATHARA HOUSE, THEKKEKKARA MURI, CHAMBAKULAM VILLAGE, KUTTANAD TALUK, PIN CODE-688

503.

4 FR. DAMIYANOS, AGED 65 YEARS VICAR, ST. JOHNS CHURCH, THEKKEKKARA P.O, THEKKEKKARA MURI, CHAMBAKULAM VILLAGE, KUTTANAD TALUK, PIN CODE-688 503.

5 MAR JOSEPH PERUMTHOTTAM, AGED 70 YEARS ARCH BISHOP OF CHANGANACHERY, BISHOP'S HOUSE, CHANGANACHERRY, PIN CODE-686 101.

BY ADVS.

P.VISWANATHAN (SR.)

SHIBU JOSEPH AJITH VISWANATHAN SANU S MALAKEEL SAYED MANSOOR BAFAKHY THANGAL RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF:

P.A.JOHNY KUTTY @ YOHANNAN, AGED 60 YEARS, S/O. ANTONY, PUTHENPARAMBIL, THEKKEKKARA P.O, THEKKEKKARA MURI, CHAMBAKULAM VILLAGE, KUTTANAD TALUK, PIN CODE-688 503.

BY ADVS.

P.B.KRISHNAN P.B.SUBRAMANYAN SABU GEORGE MANU VYASAN PETER S.V.BALAKRISHNA IYER (SENIOR COUNSEL)

THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON

06.11.2023, THE COURT ON 24.11.2023 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

"C.R"

A. BADHARUDEEN, J.

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

R.S.A No.530 of 2021 ================================

Dated this the 24^th day of November, 2023

J U D G M E N T

The defendants in O.S.No.623/2015 on the files of the Principal Munsiff Court, Alappuzha, who are aggrieved by the decree and judgment in the above case dated 31.10.2019, confirmed by the Additional District Court-II, Alappuzha in A.S.No.74/2019 along with cross objection, vide decree and judgment dated 27.01.2021, have filed this Second Appeal under Order XLII Rule 1 read with Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short `C.P.C' hereafter for convenience). The respondent in this Second Appeal is the sole plaintiff in the Suit.

2. I shall refer the parties in this appeal with reference to their status before the trial court, as `plaintiff’ and `defendants’

hereafter for easy reference.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants/defendants and the sole respondent/plaintiff, on admission.

4. Perused the lower court records and the judgments under challenge.

5. In this matter, the plaintiff filed Suit for permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants and their men from closing or reducing the width of plaint C schedule road, which is available towards the plaint A schedule property owned by the plaintiff for vehicular traffic, when he apprehended obstruction of the same by the defendants. According to the plaintiff, plaint C schedule is a public road having 45 metre length and 12 feet width vested in Panchayat and, therefore, the defendants have no manner of right to obstruct the same.

6. Defendants 1 to 5 filed joint written statement and additional written statement admitting the existence of plaint C schedule road having a width of 6 feet being part of plaint B schedule property owned by the defendants. They specifically disputed the nature of the road as public road having a width of 12 feet.

7. Referring to the above pleadings, the trial court ventured the matter. PWs 1 to 7 were examined and Exts.A1 to A8 series were marked on the side of the plaintiff. DW1 to DW5 were examined and Exts.B1 to B7 were marked on the side of the defendants. Ext.C1 series were marked as court exhibits and Exts.X1 to X6 were also marked.

8. On appreciation of evidence, the trial court granted prohibitory injunction against obstruction of `C' schedule road, confining th