CHIDAMBARAM PILLAI Vs. MADHAVI AMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The C.M.A. was allowed by this Court and the judgment of the District Judge in A. S.343 of 1981 remanding the case to the Trial Court was set aside. The judgment and decree of the Trial Court were confirmed.

(2.) Plaintiff filed the suit for declaration of her right to use the plaint B schedule pathway as the only access to plaint A schedule property and also for the removal of the wall constructed in the plaint B schedule pathway to prevent her ingress and egress to her property. Relief for mandatory injunction was also sought for in the suit. The Trial Court decreed the suit and held that the plaintiff is entitled to the declaration and mandatory injunction.

(3.) This Court held that the District Judge was not justified in remanding the case in view of the specific stand of defendants 3 and 4 in the case. The third defendant (Kerala State Housing Board) admitted in the written statement that the roads inside the colony were surrendered to the Corporation of Trivandrum in order to provide street light, drainage, water connections etc. at the letter's expense. Third defendant further stated that only in case the roads were surrendered to the Corporation the above facilities would be provided by the Corporation at its cost and it is the duty of the Corporation to maintain the road. Fourth defendant (Corporation of Trivandrum) made the assurance that it will conduct proper enquiry and take action against the persons responsible for the unauthorised construction. Corporation claimed that it is vested with statutory powers to demolish the unauthorised construction and asserted that it will not hesitate to take necessary action. Dw. 1 admitted in evidence that the road was surrendered to the Corporation.