LAWS(KER)-2011-6-234

KALLIYARA ESTATES PVT LTD Vs. STATE OF KERALA

Decided On June 07, 2011
KALLIYARA ESTATES PVT LTD Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KERALA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, the plaintiff in O.S. No. 205 of 2006, Sub Court, Palakkad, is aggrieved by the order dated 11.8.2010 passed by the court below dismissing I.A. No. 133 of 2010 filed by the plaintiff for summoning witnesses. The suit is for a declaration that the plaint schedule property, having an extent of 3300 acres, exclusively belongs to the plaintiff and that defendants 1 to 8 or any of them have no manner of right, title, possession or interest in the property. There is also a prayer for permanent prohibitory injunction restraining defendants 1 to 8 from trespassing into the plaint schedule property. Defendants 1 to 8 are: (1) State of Kerala; (2) Conservator and Custodian of Vested Forest, Olavakkode, Palakkad; (3) District Forest Officer, Olavakkode; (4) Village Officer, Malampuzha; (5) Kerala Forest Development Corporation; (6) Prakashini. G. Menon; (7) Jayasree Nair and (8) Kallekulangara Sri Emoor Bhagavathy Temple. In the written statement filed by the third defendant, a contention is raised that the suit is barred under the provisions of the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971.

(2.) The plaintiff filed I.A. No. 133 of 2010 to issue summons to examine the following persons as witnesses on behalf of the plaintiff. They are: (1) The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Thiruvananthapuram; (2) the second defendant; (3) The former Forest Divisional Officer, Olavakkod, Palakkad; and (4) The Range Officer, Walayar, Palakkad. The application was opposed by the defendants. The court below, by the order impugned in this Original Petition, dismissed the application on the ground that the petitioner did not mention the purpose for which the witnesses are proposed to be examined and also on the ground that the petitioner did not file a witness list in form No. 20 as stipulated under Rule 69 of the Civil Rules of Practice, Kerala.

(3.) In the affidavit accompanying the application, the petitioner stated thus: