KURIACHAN Vs. MADANAMOHANAN NAIR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner is the petitioner in M.C. No. 76 of 2009 on the files of the Court of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Muvattupuzha.

(2.) The revision petitioner filed a petition before the learned Magistrate alleging that some tress situated in the compound of the first respondent herein was leaning towards the property of the revision petitioner, causing threat and danger to the life of the revision petitioner and his family. The learned Magistrate, on receipt of the above said petition, called for a report from the Village Officer, Memmury. After obtaining the report from the Village Officer, the learned Magistrate passed a conditional order directing the first respondent to cut and remove the branches of one teak tree, six Anjali trees and other trees within seven days of the receipt of the order or to appear before the learned Magistrate on 18.9.2008 at 11.00 a.m. and show cause why the order should not be made absolute. The first respondent appeared before the learned Magistrate and filed objection. Thereafter, the proceedings were dropped on finding that civil case was pending before the Munsiff Court.

(3.) Thereafter, as per the direction of the High Court in O.P.(Crl.) No. 1872 of 2011, the revision petitioner again filed an application before the learned Magistrate. The learned Magistrate again obtained the report from the Village Officer and passed a conditional order under Sec. 133(1) of the Code directing the first respondent herein to cut and remove the branches of four Anjali trees, one vatta tree and other trees situated in the property of the first respondent or to appear before the learned Magistrate on 8.2.2013 at 11 a.m. and show cause why the order should not be made absolute. The first respondent appeared before the learned Magistrate and filed counter. Thereafter, the court below made the conditional order absolute under Sec. 138(2) of the Code.