M.R.Harikumar vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 64 Ker

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 64 Ker
Judgement Date : 3 January, 2022

Kerala High Court

M.R.Harikumar vs State Of Kerala on 3 January, 2022

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                           PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
 MONDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 13TH POUSHA, 1943
                   OP(C) NO. 2523 OF 2021
PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF:

           M.R.HARIKUMAR, AGED 62 YEARS,
           S/O.PADMAVATHI AMMA, DOCUMENT WRITER,
           DOOR NO.37/199, M.R ENTERPRISES,
           RAILWAY STATION ROAD, AIMS P.O., EDAPPALLY ,
           KOCHI-682 041, EDAPPALLY NORTH VILLAGE,
           KANAYANNUR TALUK,

           RESIDING AT KESAVA VILASAM, GLASS FACTORY ROAD,
           RAJAGIRI P.O., KALAMASSERY,
           THRIKKAKKARA NORTH VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK,
           ERNAKULAM-683 104.

           BY ADVS.
           SRI.K.C.CHARLES
           SRI.M.POLY MATHAI
           SRI.VIMAL K.CHARLES
           SRI.A.T.RENJU
RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS:

    1      STATE OF KERALA,
           REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE DEPARTMENT
           OF PUBLIC WORKS, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695 001.

    2      DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
           ERNAKULAM, COLLECTORATE, CIVIL LANE, KAKKANADU,
           ERNAKULAM,PIN-682 030.

    3      ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
           PWD ROADS SUB DIVISION, THRIKKAKARA P.O.,
           KOCHI-682 021.

    4      P.A RAZIA, WHITE WAY HOUSE,
           ORUMANOOR, THRISSUR-680 512.

           BY ADV. SRI.K.DENNY DEVASSY, GP

     THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 O.P.(C).No.2523 of 2021

                               2

                          JUDGMENT

This Original Petition has been filed by

the petitioner, who is the plaintiff in

O.S.No.377/2016 on the file of 2nd Additional

Munsiff's Court, Ernakulam.

2. The prayer in the petition is to set

aside Ext.P9 order in toto and Ext.P5 to the

extent it relates to issue no.1 as to title of

the plaintiff framed by the 2nd additional

Munsiff, Ernakulam.

3. At the time of admission, it has been

argued by the learned counsel for the

petitioner that in a suit for injunction

simpliciter, possession alone is the issue to

be framed and the court below went wrong in

framing an issue to decide the title of the

plaintiff. Then the learned counsel was asked

to read the plaint averments claiming

possession alone without reference to title, O.P.(C).No.2523 of 2021

she read-out paragraph 3 of the plaint,

wherein, it has been stated that the plaintiff

claimed title and consequential possession.

In Ext.P9 order, the learned Munsiff recited

decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in

Anathula Sudhakar v. P.Buchi Reddy : AIR SC

2033 and held as under:

a suit for injunction simpliciter is concerned only with possession and normally the issue of title will not be directly and substantially in issue. It is also held in the above case that where the plaintiff is in possession, but his title to the property is in dispute, or under a cloud, or where the defendant asserts title thereto and there is also a threat of dispossession from defendant, the plaintiff will have to sue for declaration of title and consequential relief of injunction.

4. When reading the recitals in the

plaint, in tune with the settled law, it could

be seen that the plaintiff is claiming

possession based on title and the title of the O.P.(C).No.2523 of 2021

plaintiff has been challenged by the 4th

defendant in her written statement. In such a

suit, one of the issue to be decided, no

doubt, must be the question of title. In view

of the matter, the court below is right in

passing Ext.P9 order.

5. Ext.P5 impugned herein is the issue

framed by the learned Munsiff. The 1st issue