RADHAKRISHNAN Vs. K RAMESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is the judgment debtor in E.P.No.45 of 2006 in O.S.No.303 of 1999 of the Court of learned Munsiff, Devikulam. Learned Munsiff granted a decree for prohibitory injunction restraining petitioner from interfering with the enjoyment of plaint B schedule way which according to respondent is necessary for access to the plaint A schedule belonging to him. He raised a plea of easement. There was a decree on settlement whereby the right of respondent to use B schedule way was upheld. Respondent filed execution petition contending that petitioner caused obstruction in the B schedule way. That ofcourse was denied by petitioner. An enquiry followed. Advocate Commissioner appointed by the executing court inspected property and submitted report and sketch. Oral evidence also was recorded. Based on that, executing court found that there was obstruction caused by the petitioner to B schedule way and by Ext.P5, order directed its removal within one month failing which respondent was permitted to get the obstruction removed through the process of Court.

(2.) NOW, two contentions are raised, firstly, there is no such obstruction caused by the petitioner and, secondly; the way that the Advocate Commissioner has reported is through the middle of property of petitioner and not along the southern boundary as the decree provided. Learned counsel has submitted that petitioner is prepared to file an affidavit in that line in this Court. There is also a further request that removal of obstruction if any may be done in the presence of an Advocate Commissioner who is to identify the B schedule way.