Kerala High Court
State Of Kerala And Another vs Mohammed Sidhique And Others on 25 August, 2022
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
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
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
