MOOSA Vs. CHANGARANCHOLA UNNEEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the second plaintiff in OS No.263/2010 on the file of Munsiff's Court, Tirur, the plaint of which is produced as Ext.P1. The suit is one for setting out a pathway leading to the plaint A and B scheduled properties through the property of the first defendant over which the plaintiffs claim right of easement under Section 14 of the Indian Easements Act, 1882. Consequential injunction to prevent the defendants from causing any obstruction to the plaintiffs using the disputed pathway is also sought.

(2.) A commission report together with a rough sketch produced as Ext.P2 is already filed before the Court. The plaintiffs want to set out the exact position of the pathway over which they claim right of easement and hence filed Ext.P3 application as IA No.2025/2011 for taking out a commission for the purpose of remitting the commission report and setting out pathway as claimed by the plaintiffs.

(3.) The learned Munsiff dismissed the application vide Ext.P4 impugned order stating thus: "setting out a way would arise only if it is found that he is entitled to get a way set out. In that situation, further direction can be given to the commissioner. There is no need to identify the property belonging to the father of the 1st defendant. I am satisfied that there is absolutely no need to remit the commission report. Hence, I.A. dismissed".