- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
JOSEPH v. THODUPUZHA MUNCIPALITY AND OTHERS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
THURSDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1943 WP(C).No.30233 OF 2011(D)
PETITIONER/S:
JOSEPH
NADACKAL HOUSE, RAJAKKAD VILLAGE, RAJAKKAD,,
REPRESENTED BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, M.L.GEORGE,
S/O.LUKA, AGED 65 YEARS,, MALIACKAL HOUSE, KOODARANJI.
BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (SR.)
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THODUPUZHA MUNCIPALITY,
THODUPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,, PIN-685 584.
2 ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENIGNEER
THODUPUZHA MUNCIPALITY,, MUNCIPAL OFFICE,
THODUPUZHA,PIN-685 584.
3 K.H.SHOUKATALI SO.HASSAN KHAN
AGED 46 YEARS,, KAVANAL HOUSE, THALAMATTAM,
THODUPUZHA-685 584.
4 K.A.JOSEPH SO.ANTONY AGED 44 YEARS
KALATHIPARAMBIL HOUSE, THODUPUZHA-685 584.
R1 BY SHRI.UNNIKRISHNAN V.ALAPPATT, SC, THODUPUZHA
MUNICIPALITY
R3 BY ADV. SRI.JOICE GEORGE
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08.04.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
1
Dated this the 8th day of April, 2021.
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to quash Ext.P7 intimation dated 22.10.2011 issued by the Assistant Executive Engineer, Thodupuzha Municipality directing him to produce a new plan marking the nearby private pathway, since a complaint was received by the Assistant Executive Engineer. It is submitted that the construction in accordance with Ext.P3 building permit dated 30.11.2010 was carried out by the petitioner without encroaching into the said private pathway.
2. Anyhow, the learned counsel appearing for respondents 3 and 4 i.e., Sri. K.H. Shoukatali and Sri. K. A Joseph, submitted that though the construction is complete, a second appeal is pending consideration before this Court with regard to certain civil disputes by and between the parties and that the disposal of the writ petition may not affect the consideration of the said second appeal in accordance with law and on merits.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner Sri. George Cherian, the learned Standing Counsel for the Municipality Sri.
2
Unnikrishnan V. Alappat and the learned counsel appearing for respondents 3 and 4 Sri.Joice George and perused the pleadings and materials on record.
4. The discussion of facts made above would make it clear that at this distance of time, the consideration of the matter on the merits is not required, in view of the subsequent developments that have taken place during the pendency of the writ petition and the construction of the building apparently seems to be complete. Therefore, I do not think, anything survives to be adjudicated in this writ petition.
Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of recording that the construction of the building is complete, however, making it clear that if any proceeding is pending before the Municipality in respect of the occupancy of the building or others or any civil disputes pending by and between the petitioner and respondents 3 and 4, all those aspects shall be left open to be considered by the Secretary of the Municipality and the respective civil court.
sd/-
SHAJI P. CHALY,
JUDGE.
Rv
3
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXT. P1: TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.1126/1987 OF THODUPUZHA SRO. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL DECREE IN O.S NO. 45/83 OF MUNSIFF'S COURT,
THODUPUZHA.
EXT.P2(a): TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONER IN FINAL DECREE PROCEEDINGS IN O.S. NO. 45/83 OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, THODUPUZHA.
EXT.P2(b): TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH PREPARED AS PER THE COMMISSION ORDER IN O.S. NO. 45/83.
EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT ISSUED BY SECOND REPSONDENT DATED
30.11.2010 TO THE PETITIONER.
EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S. NO. 226/2011 OF MUNSIFF'S COURT,
THODUPUZHA.
EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION TO THE INJUNCTION APPLICATION FILED BY
THE PETITIONER.
EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF O.S. NO. 236/2011 BEFORE MUNSIFF'S COURT,
THODUPUZHA.
EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 22.10.2011.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL
/True Copy/
PS to Judge.
rv
4
Alert