R.RADHKRISHNAN NAIR Vs. B.GOPA KUMARI AMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An order remitting the Commissioner's report and plan, is under challenge by the defendant in the suit.

(2.) The respondent as plaintiff filed a suit for prohibitory injunction to restrain the petitioner- defendant from obstructing the plaint B schedule pathway. The plaintiff and defendant are siblings. The properties of both the plaintiff and the defendant originally belonged to their parents. The plaint A schedule property was conveyed by the parents to the plaintiff. A right of way was provided for the plaintiff, through the remaining portion of the property that was retained by the parents. Thereafter the remaining property referred to above was conveyed by them to the petitioner-defendant. The suit is filed on the allegation that the defendant is attempting to obstruct the pathway.

(3.) In the suit a Commissioner was deputed to identify and locate the plaint B schedule way as described in the document. He has filed a plan and report. The dispute between the parties, as of now, is regarding the location of the pathway. According to the petitioner-defendant, the pathway is provided on the eastern extremity of the defendant's property, just to the west of a row of coconut trees that were in existence at the time of conveyance, but which are not presently in existence. According to the respondent-plaintiff, the trees referred to in the settlement deed are still in existence and the pathway is to be located to the west of the trees.