Kerala High Court
Santhoshkumar P.R vs V.N.Gopinathan Pillai on 11 August, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 20TH SRAVANA, 1943
RP NO. 858 OF 2019
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C).NO.42441/2018 OF THE HIGH COURT OF
KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 4 AND 5:
1 SANTHOSHKUMAR P.R., AGED 45 YEARS,
S/O.LATE RAJAPPAN K.K., PANAMKUZHIYIL HOUSE, ANICADU MURI,
ANICADU VILLAGE, MALLAPPALLY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA
DISTRICT.
2 RADHAKRISHNAN K., AGED 50 YEARS,
S/O.DAMODHARAN K., KALLOOKUNNEL, NOOROMMAVU P.O., ANICADU
MURI, ANICADU VILLAGE, MALLAPPALLY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA
DISTRICT.
BY ADVS. SRI.P.HARIDAS, SRI.CHERIAN GEE VARGHESE,
SRI.BIJU HARIHARAN, SRI.RENJI GEORGE CHERIAN,
SRI.P.C.SHIJIN, SRI.RISHIKESH HARIDAS
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3:
1 V.N.GOPINATHAN PILLAI, AGED 76 YEARS,
S/O.NARAYANAN PILLAI, VALIYATHOTTATHIL HOUSE, KOTTANAL
P.O., CHUNKAPPARA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN-684547.
2 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
LAND REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001.
3 DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PATHANAMTHITTA, 2ND FLOOR, DISTRICT
COLLECTORATE, PATHANAMTHITTA P.O., PIN-689645.
4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ANICADU VILLAGE, NOOROMAVU P.O.,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN-689645.
SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, SR.GOVT.PLEADER FOR R2 TO R4
SRI.P.A.SALIM, ADVOCATE FOR R1
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11.08.2021, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
------------------------------------------------
R.P. No. 858 of 2019
in
W.P.(C) No. 42441 of 2018
------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 11th day of August, 2021
ORDER
The afore captioned petition has been filed by
respondents 4 & 5 in WP(C) No.42441/2018 seeking to review the
impugned judgment dated 3.1.2019 in the above WP(C), filed by
R-1 herein.
2. Heard Sri.P.Haridas, learned counsel appearing for
the review petitioners (R-4 & R-5 in the WP(C)), Sri.P.A.Salim,
learned counsel appearing for R-1 herein (writ petitioner) and
Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Senior Government Pleader
appearing for official respondents 2 to 4 in the R.P. (R-1 to R-3 in
the WP(C)).
3. The contesting respondents in the above writ petition
has now filed the instant review petition pointing out that the
impugned judgment has been rendered by this Court without
issuing notice to them. Further, it is pointed out that crucial and
relevant aspects of the matter could not be pointed out before this
R.P. No. 858/2019 in
W.P.(C) No. 42441/2018
..3..
Court as they were not heard, etc. Further, that the review
petitioners have already filed a civil suit as O.S. No. 418/2017
before the Munsiff Court, Thiruvalla, in which the said Court had
granted Anx-3 interim injunction order dated 20.10.2017 on
I.A.No.3355/2017 in the said O.S. and further that the plaint
schedule property covered by Anx-3 is the same or part of the
subject property covered by the proceedings initiated by the writ
petitioner purportedly under Sec.133 Cr.P.C. before the
respondent RDO/Collector. Further, it is also pointed out that
subsequently, the review petitioners have also secured Anx-7
interim order dated 8.8.2019 in WP(C).No.21810/2019 filed by
the review petitioners herein (in which the writ petitioner herein
has been arrayed as R-8 therein), wherein status quo was ordered
as regards the subject property concerned, and that the subject
property covered by Anx-7 proceedings is the plaint schedule
property covered by Anx-3 in civil court proceedings, and is also
the same or part of the property covered by aforesaid Sec.123
proceedings referred to in Anx-4 notice. Further that, this Court
has later extended the interim order at Anx-7 on 5.11.2019. It
appears that, pursuant to directions issued by this Court in the
R.P. No. 858/2019 in
W.P.(C) No. 42441/2018
..4..
impugned judgment, the respondent District Collector/RDO has
now initiated proceedings referred to in Anx-4 notice dated
27.7.2019 for consideration of proceedings under Sec.133 Cr.P.C.
4. As rightly submitted by Sri.P.A.Salim, learned counsel
appearing for R-1 herein/writ petitioner, this Court cannot find
fault with the writ petitioner for not disclosing material aspects as
in Anx-3 interim injunction order, Anx-7 etc since, the writ
petitioner herein is not a party to the civil court proceedings at
Anx-3. But, this Court had indeed issued notice to the contesting
respondents in the WP(C)/review petitioners herein, then the said
parties could have brought to the notice of this Court about the
issuance of Anx-3 interim injunction order by the civil court,
issued as early as on 20.10.2017 etc.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the
case it is ordered that the respondent District Collector/RDO, as
the case may be, will ascertain from the Government Pleader, if
any, attached to the civil court, Thiruvalla, who has issued Anx-3
order as to whether the interim injunction referred to in Anx-3 is
still in force, and about the present stage of the case, and also may
ascertain about the plaint schedule property covered by Anx-3.
R.P. No. 858/2019 in
W.P.(C) No. 42441/2018
..5..
Further, the review petitioners may produce attested copies of
Anx-2 title deed and copy of the plaint, written statement, as well
as copy of Anx-3 interim injunction order in O.S. No. 418/2017,
now on the file of the Munsiff Court, Thiruvalla, before the
respondent District Collector/RDO. Thereupon, the respondent
District Collector/RDO, as the case may be, may ascertain as to
whether the plaint schedule property referred to in Anx-3 is the
same or part of the property which is the subject matter of the
proceedings referred to in Anx-4 notice dated 27.7.2019.
Thereafter, the information so elicited by the respondent District
Collector/RDO should be given in advance to both, the writ
petitioner as well as the review petitioners.
6. Thereafter, the respondent District Collector/RDO, as
the case may be, will afford reasonable opportunity of being heard
to the review petitioners, and if it is found that the plaint schedule
property covered by Anx-3 civil court proceedings is the same or
part of the property which is the subject matter of Anx-4 notice,
then further steps in pursuance of Anx-4 notice may be kept in
abeyance until the final verdict of the civil court in Anx-3 civil suit.
However, the respondent District Collector/RDO will be at liberty
R.P. No. 858/2019 in
W.P.(C) No. 42441/2018
..6..
to conduct proper enquiries through the competent revenue
officials concerned, to ascertain as to whether the review
petitioners have encroached into any public 'thodu' which is
vested with the Government, under the guise of Anx-3 interim
injunction order, and if it found that any such encroachment have
been made by the review petitioners into any 'thodu' or public
property vested with the State Government etc then the
respondent District Collector may give necessary instructions to
the revenue officials concerned and the learned Government
Pleader concerned, to take necessary steps including the option of
filing application for getting the revenue department impleaded as
an additional party in Anx-3 civil suit, and for appropriate
clarifications or orders from the civil court, so as to grant liberty to
the respondent District Collector/RDO to take action under
Sec.133Cr.P.C. for ensuring that the right of public 'thodu' is not in
any manner obstructed, or for taking any further action to ensure
encroachment into public property is removed in accordance with
law, etc.
7. This Court has passed the latter directions only in view
of the submissions made by learned counsel appearing for the writ
R.P. No. 858/2019 in
W.P.(C) No. 42441/2018
..7..
petitioner based on Ext.P-1(4) report dated 15.4.2015 said to have
been submitted by the Village Officer to the Tahsildar concerned.
The directions and orders passed by this Court in the judgment
dated 3.1.2019 in WP(C).No.42441/2018 will stand modified as
above.
With these observations and directions, the above
Review Petition will stand finally disposed of.
Sd/-
ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE
MMG
SDK
R.P. No. 858/2019 in
W.P.(C) No. 42441/2018
..8..
APPENDIX OF RP.NO.858/2019
PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE 1 TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE DEED OF THE 1ST
PETITIONER I.E., PARTITION DEED
NO.1590/1/2011 DATED 9.8.2011.
ANNEXURE 2 TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE DEED OF THE 2ND
PETITIONER I.E., SALE DEED NO.762/2014
DATED 19.4.2014.
ANNEXURE 3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF INJUNCTION
IN OS NO.418/2017 OF THE MUNSIFF COURT
DATED 20.10.2017.
ANNEXURE 4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED
27.7.2019 FROM OFFICE OF THE 3RD
RESPONDENT PROPOSING TO CONDUCT HEAR-
ING ON 3.8.2019.
ANNEXURE 5 TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER
DATED 22.06.1989.
ANNEXURE 6 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
3.8.2019.
ANNEXURE 7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN WP(C)
NO.21810/2019 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT
DATED 8.8.2019.
