BOSE Vs. GERVASIS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is the first defendant in O. S. No. 1864/2004, on the file of Munsiff Court, ernakulam. First respondent is the plaintiff and other respondents, other defendants in the suit. The suit was filed seeking a decree directing defendants to effect sale of the plaint schedule property by executing a sale deed, for a declaration of title perfected by adverse possession and also for permanent injunction. Admittedly, after issues were settled, suit was included in the special list on 6. 12. 2007. Evidence was partly recorded. While so, finding that there is a chance of settlement, on 18. 1. 2008, the suit was referred to Permanent Lok Adalat. The case was pending before the Adalat since then. It is represented that even though the case was referred to Adalat, the suit was being posted by the learned Munsiff in the court also to find out whether a settlement is arrived at or not. On 29. 3. 2008, finding that the matter has riot been settled in the Adalat, the Trial court passed an order directing the Adalat to sent back the records, so as to proceed with the file. The said order is challenged in this Writ Petition filed under Art. 227 of the constitution of India.

(2.) THE learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the first respondent were heard. The report called for from the Trial Court was perused.

(3.) BOTH the learned counsel for the petitioner and first respondent submitted that on 1. 2. 2008, there was a posting before the Permanent Lok Adalat, and Adalat had arrived at a settlement and directed the parties to measure the property having an extent of 32 cents and to prepare a plan. It is submitted that the settlement was to measure the property within 30 days. It is before the expiry of that said period, the case was called for by the learned Munsiff on 29. 3. 2008, as it was felt that the matter will not be settled. As pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, on the face of it, mere is procedural irregularity committed by the learned Munsiff. The Munsiff has ignored the provisions of Legal Service Authorities Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' ).