IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN
THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 3RD BHADRA, 1944
RSA NO. 1078 OF 2010
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OS 143/2005 OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, KASARAGOD
AS 4/2006 OF SUB COURT, KASARAGOD
-----
APPELLANTS/APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS 1 & 2:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KASARGOD, COLLECTORATE VIDYA
NAGAR,MAUTTATHODY VILLAGE, TALUK AND VIDYANAGAR POST,
KASARGOD TALUK AND DISTRICT.
2 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, (ROADS), PILIKUNNU, KASARGOD VILLAGE
AND POST, KASARGOD TALUK AND DISTRICT.
BY SMT.REKHA C. NAIR, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
RESPONDENTS:
1 MOHAMMED SIDHIQUE, AGED 31 YEARS,
S/O.YOUSUF ABDULLA, MUSLIM, BUSINESSMAN, R/AT ALBUSRA HOUSE,
ALBUSRA COMPLEX,, PAIVALIKE VILLAGE AND POST, KASARGOD TALUK
AND, DISTRICT.
2 MANCHERI M AGED 35 YEARS
S/O.DAMODAR ACHARYA HINDU,TRADER, SANGEETHA JWELLERY WORKS,
DAMODARA COMPLEX, PAIVALIKE PAIVALIKE VILLAGE AND POST,
KASARAGOD TALUK AND DISTRICT-67348.
RSA NO. 1078 OF 2010 -2-
3 CM.ABDULLA, AGED 45 YEARS
CONTRACTOR, BENVINJE HOUSE, CHENGALA VILLAGE AND POST,
KASARAGOD TALUK AND DISTRICT-671541.
BY ADVS.
SRI.S.V.BALAKRISHNA IYER SR.
SMT.GEETHA P.MENON
SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN
SRI.P.M.NEELAKANDAN
SRI.R.SURAJ KUMAR
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
SATHISH NINAN, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
R.S.A. No.1078 of 2010
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 25th day of August, 2022
J U D G M E N T
The concurrent decree in a suit for mandatory injunction is under challenge by the defendants 1 and 2.
2. The suit was for a mandatory injunction directing the defendants to restore the road in the plaint 'B' schedule to its original condition by removing the mud dumped therein, or in the alternative to provide proper drainage to drain out water from the plaint 'A' schedule property belonging to the plaintiffs.
3. The trial court decreed the suit in the following terms:-
"In the result, suit is decreed directing the defendants to provide proper drainage facility by constructing a culvert across the road 'R' in the 'B' schedule for the free flow of rain water from the A schedule property through the B schedule towards the pallam on the south of the road within one month from the date of this decree, failing which plaintiff can execute R.S.A. No.1078 of 2010 -: 2 :- the decree through process of law at the cost of defendants. The defendants are also liable to pay the costs of the suit to the plaintiffs."
4. Defendants 1 and 2 challenged the same in appeal; however, were unsuccessful. It is aggrieved thereby that this Regular Second Appeal has been filed.
5. Heard Smt.Rekha C. Nair, learned Senior Government Pleader on behalf of the appellants and Sri.S.V.Balakrishna Iyer, learned Senior Counsel on behalf of respondents 1 and 2-plaintiffs.
6. Pending the appeal, the learned Senior Government Pleader has filed a memo dated 26.05.2022 before this Court, producing therewith a report of the Executive Engineer, PWD Roads Division, Kasaragod dated 20.05.2022. The report is to the effect that the grievance of the plaintiffs have been redressed by providing adequate drainage facilities. The learned counsel on either sides submit that, in the light of the R.S.A. No.1078 of 2010 -: 3 :- report it could be taken that the decree has been satisfied, and the appeal could be closed.
In the light of the above, the Regular Second Appeal is closed.
Sd/-
SATHISH NINAN JUDGE kns/-
//True Copy// P.S. to Judge