Raji.R vs Renjith Kumar
2022 Latest Caselaw 9470 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI

 THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 3RD BHADRA, 1944
                       RP NO. 824 OF 2022
   AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 10.06.2022 IN WP(C)
            18822/2022 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

PETITIONER/3RD PARTY:

            RAJI.R
            AGED 60 YEARS,
            W/O.LATE SYAMKUMAR.B.NAIR,
            SREEVALSAM, AADHAPILLY ROAD,
            VENNALA.P.O, KOCHI-682028

            BY ADVS.
            B.RENJITHKUMAR
            CLARA SHERIN FRANCIS


RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER &RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 IN THE WRIT
PETITION:

    1       RENJITH KUMAR,
            AGED 55 YEARS, S/o.RAGHAVA KURUP
            KALATHOOR, KARUVATTA NORTH, KARUVATTA P.O
            ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-690 517
            REPRESENTD BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER
            GOLDA.G, AGED 45 YEARS, W/o.RENJITH KUMAR,
            DEVI KRIPA, KARUVATTA NORTH, KARUVATTA
            ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-690 517
    2       THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ALAPPUZHA
            ALAPPUZHA-688001.
    3       THE TALUK SURVEYOR, KARTHIKAPPALLY TALUK
            HARIPPAD, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-690 514
    4       THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KARUVATTA VILLAGE,
            ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-690 517
            SRI. BIMAL K. NATH, SR.GP.


     THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.08.2022,    THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 R.PNo.824 of 2022 in
W.P.(C).No.18822 of 2022              2




                            T.R.RAVI, J.
           ---------------------------------------------
    R.PNo.824 of 2022 in W.P.(C).No.18822 of 2022
       ------------------------------------------------------
         Dated this the 25th day of August, 2022.

                          ORDER

Review petition is filed being aggrieved by the directions

issued in the judgment in W.P(C).No.18822 of 2022 whereby the

2nd respondent was directed to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4

application at the earliest, at any rate within three months. It is

submitted that under the guise of compliance with the directions,

the rights of the petitioner for access to his property is likely to be

affected. The counsel for the first respondent submits that in

another writ petition filed by, another brother of the review

petitioner and his son, against the wife of the 1 st respondent, there

is already a direction issued by this Court that the pathway of the

petitioners therein is not blocked under the guise of the survey. The

Counsel for the review petitioner submits that the way is marked as

C schedule in the plaint in O.S.No.50/2022 pending before the Sub

Court, Mavelikkara.

R.PNo.824 of 2022 in

2. In view of the objections regarding the directions

issued, the review petition is allowed. Paragraph 3 and last

paragraph of the judgment in W.P.(C)No.18822/2022 is replaced by

adding the following paragraphs.

"3. In view of the limited prayer made, the writ

petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to

consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 application at the

earliest, at any rate, within three months from the

date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

4. While considering and passing orders on Ext.P4

application the review petitioner shall also be heard

and any survey that is conducted shall be without

obstructing C Schedule pathway. "

      Issue copy today itself.                      Sd/-

                                               T.R.RAVI
                                               JUDGE

LEK
 R.PNo.824 of 2022 in

APPENDIX OF R.PNo.824 of 2022 in W.P.(C).No.18822 of 2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS No.50/2022 BEFORE THE SUB COURT, MAVELIKKARA FILED BY THE PETITIONER ON 20.08.2022