LILLYKUTTY JOHN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BETWEEN the petitioner and respondents 3 to 11, there is a civil dispute pending. The petitioner asserts her right to construct a compound wall around the property belonging to her. Respondents 3 to 11 object to the attempt to construct the compound wall asserting a right of way through the property. Admittedly the petitioner had earlier permitted movement of vehicles etc. through the alleged pathway. But according to the petitioner, that was done not in recognition of any right of respondents 3 to 11, but only on humanitarian grounds to ensure that the relief of tsunami rehabilitation was made available to the sufferers.

(2.) BE that as it may, respondents 3 to 11 have already gone to the civil court asserting a right of way through the property of the petitioner. They had sought an interim relief also. It was initially granted. But subsequently by Ext.P4 order, after appearance of the petitioner, the said interim order was vacated. The learned counsel for respondents 3 to 11 submits that the said order is challenged and is pending before the appellate court, ie. District Court, Mavelikkara, as C.M.A No.6 of 2011.

(3.) THIS Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed with the above observations.