CHACKO JOSEPH Vs. THOMAS PHILIP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Exhibits P4 and P6 orders passed by the learned Munsiff, Changanacherry in O.S. No. 344 of 2010 is under challenge at the instance of petitioner/plaintiff. Petitioner sued the respondent for a decree for prohibitory and mandatory injunction. According to the petitioner, respondent removed lateral support the suit property was enjoying and hence respondent is liable to restore that lateral support. Petitioner prayed for a decree for prohibitory injunction to restrain the respondent from removing earth from the collapsed portion of Item No. 2 and for a mandatory injunction to direct respondent restore lateral support for Item No. 1. Alternatively, it was prayed that in case the respondent fails to comply with the decree for mandatory injunction, petitioner may be allowed to provide lateral support and realise its expenses from the respondent. Petitioner paid court fee under Section 27(1) of the Kerala Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1959 (for short 'the Act') valuing the reliefs at Rs. 500/- each.

(2.) Respondents resisted the suit on various grounds. While so, after evidence was recorded, learned Munsiff passed Exhibit P4, order suo motu on 20-12-2012 that petitioner seeks to recover cost of construction of a granite wall from the respondent on his default to construct the same, cost of construction as per evidence would come to Rs. 1,99,00,000/- and in the circumstance, petitioner, for the purpose of jurisdiction, has to specify the amount which is sought to be recovered.

(3.) Petitioner filed I.A. No. 87 of 2013 for review of the said order. That resulted in Exhibit P6, order. Learned Munsiff reiterated the stand in Exhibit P4, order.