Ms.Pathunni Umma v. Shihabudin
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/4TH CHAITHRA, 1937 WA.No. 718 of 2015 () IN WP(C).5075/2015 ------------------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 5075/2015 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 06-03-2015 APPELLANT/4TH RESPONDENT IN THE WP(C):- ----------------------------------------------------------------- MS.PATHUNNI UMMA, CHELENGARA KURIKKAL KARIVARAMKUNDU VAZHI, IRINGATTIRI P.O MALAPPURAM - 676 523 REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MR.ISHAQUE A.T. BY ADVS.SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.P.GOPINATH SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN SRI.KURYAN THOMAS RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS 1 & 2/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 IN THE WP(C):- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. SHIHABUDIN, MUTTUPPARA HOUSE, EDAPATTA P.O, MELATTOR VAZHI MALAPPURAM - 679 326.
2. BUSHARA, MUTTUPPARA HOUSE, EDAPATTA P.O MELATTOR VAZHI, MALAPPURAM - 679 326.
3. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 004 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, K.S.E.B., PERINTHALMANNA MALAPPURAM - 679 322.
5. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, K.S.E.B, MELATTOOR MALAPPURAM - 679 326.
R3 -R 5 BY ADV. SMT.P.K.RADHIKA-KSEB R1 TO R2 BY SRI.P.JAYARAM THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
P.N.RAVINDRAN & ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JJ.
--------------------------- W.A. No.718 of 2015 -------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of March, 2015
J U D G M E N T
P.N.Ravindran, J.
The appellant is the fourth respondent in W.P.(C) No.5075 of 2015. Respondents 1 and 2 are the petitioners and respondents 3 to 5 are respondents 1 to 3 therein. Respondents 1 and 2 filed W.P.(C) No.5075 of 2015 challenging Ext.P11 proceedings dated 8.12.2014 issued by the third respondent in the writ petition whereby he took the stand that the electricity connection can be provided to the residence of the writ petitioners only after the civil suit instituted by the appellant in O.S.No.212 of 2014 on the file of the Court of the Munsiff of Perinthalmanna is tried and disposed of.
2. The writ petitioners (Respondents 1 and 2) are admittedly in possession of the plaint schedule property in O.S.No.212 of 2014. The relief sought in O.S.No.212 of 2014 is for recovery of possession on the strength of title. The appellant has also prayed for a mandatory injunction directing the defendants to demolish and remove the sheds put up by them in the plaint schedule property. It is evident from the averments in the plaint in O.S.No.212 of 2014 that the writ petitioners are in possession and enjoyment of the suit
WA No.718/2015 property and they have put up buildings therein. In such circumstances, as rightly held by the learned single Judge, the appellant cannot be heard to contend that electricity connection should not be provided to the buildings standing in the plaint schedule property. So long as the defendants in the suit are in possession of the plaint schedule property, they are entitled to exercise acts of possession. The appellant cannot in our opinion legitimately object to the electricity connection being granted to the buildings situate in the plaint schedule property. If the appellant succeeds and the suit is decreed as prayed for, she will get possession of the property and the buildings therein will also be demolished. The electricity connection if any granted to the writ petitioners will not stand in the way of the trial court from deciding the suit on the merits.
We therefore find no good grounds to entertain the writ appeal. The writ appeal fails and it is dismissed in limine. P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) ANIL K.NARENDRAN, (JUDGE) vps