Shanilkumar G vs Ashok Kumar
2023 Latest Caselaw 7135 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI
         FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 2ND ASHADHA, 1945
                            RSA NO. 299 OF 2023
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE IN AS 55/2006 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
                        COURT - IV, KOTTAYAM
            OS 394/2002 OF ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, KOTTAYAM
APPELLANTS/THIRD PARTIES:

     1      SHANILKUMAR G.,
            AGED 37 YEARS
            S/O GOPALAN, OPPARACKAL HOUSE, MEMURI KARA, MANJOOR
            VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,
            MOB:- 9656381755.
     2      P.G. RADHAKRISHNAN,
            S/O GOPALAN, AGED 54 YEARS, KOLLAMPARAMBIL HOUSE,
            MEMURI KARA, MANJOOR VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM
            DISTRICT, MOB:-9605796768.
     3      MOHANAN K.T.,
            S/O THEYYATHAN, AGED 63 YEARS, MARANGATTUKUNNEL HOUSE,
            MEMURI KARA, MANJOOR VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM
            DISTRICT. MOB:-9745549710.
     4      APPUKKTTAN K.K.,
            S/O KUNJAPPAN, AGED 62 YEARS, KANIYAMPARAMBIL HOUSE,
            MEMURI KARA, MANJOOR VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM
            DISTRICT, MOB:-97454472548.

            BY ADV P.K.MURALEEDHARAN


RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS/PLAINTIFF:

     1      ASHOK KUMAR,
            S/O PADMANABHAPILLAI, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
            VANIYAPPALLIL HOUSE, MEMURI, MANJOOR VILLAGE, VAIKOM
            TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.
     2      RAMANADHAN,
            S/O PADMANABHAPILLAI, AGED 40 YEARS,
            VANIYAPPALLIL HOUSE, MEMURI, MANJOOR VILLAGE, VAIKOM
            TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.
 RSA NO. 299 OF 2023

                                 2

     3      M.K. SREENIVASAN,
            S/O R. KRISHNAN EMBRAN, AGED 43 YEARS, SREEMADOM,
            MEMURI, MANJOOR VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM
            DISTRICT.


      THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 RSA NO. 299 OF 2023

                                             3

                                   T.R. RAVI, J.
                          --------------------------------------
                             R.S.A No.299 of 2023
                       ----------------------------------------------------
                      Dated this the 23rd day of June, 2023


                                    JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by third parties to the suit. The dispute

in the two suits was regarding a way, which according to the

appellants, is a public way. It is submitted that neither the

plaintiff nor the defendants in the suit are pursuing the matter in

the second appeal and as at present, an injunction has been

granted in favour of the plaintiff in O.S.No.394 of 2002. It is

submitted that even though neither of the suits were filed in a

representative capacity invoking Order 1 Rule 8 of the Code of

Civil procedure the rights of the public are affected because of

the decree.

2. I do not think that the remedy of the appellants should

be by way of a second appeal, which is only concerned with

substantial questions of law which arise from out of the suit and

appeal which were considered by the courts. Even according to RSA NO. 299 OF 2023

the appellants, the suit was not filed with an application under

Order 1 Rule 8. As such, the judgment can bind only the parties

before the court. As it is open to the appellants to approach the

civil court for remedies, I do not think this appeal should be

entertained.

The appeal is hence dismissed without prejudice to the

right of the appellants to move the appropriate civil court for

reliefs.

Sd/-

T.R.RAVI JUDGE mpm