Disposed

A.J.Varghese v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Mar 2007WP(C)/7121/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Writ Petition regarding property dispute, the Kerala High Court directed the Reservey Superintendent to conduct a measurement survey of the petitioner's property with notice to the Panchayat, on the principle that final quietus should be given to such disputes. The applicant bears the survey costs.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued to the 2nd respondent to conduct a measurement survey of the petitioner's property with notice to the 4th respondent within three months.

A.J.Varghese Vs State of Kerala — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2007)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 15TH MARCH 2007 / 24TH PHALGUNA 1928

¶5

WP(C).No. 7121 of 2007(W) -------------------------

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

¶8

A.J. VARGHESE, S/O.OUSEPH, ADAVICHIRA KANNANKOTTAL HOUSE, PALLIKKACHIRA P.O., PAIPAD MURI, CHANGANASSERRY TALUK.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.P.HARIDAS

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

¶12

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶13

RESERVEY SUPERINTENDENT, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶14

TALUK SURVEYOR, TALUK OFFICE, MALLAPPALLY.

¶15

MALLAPPALLY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶16

R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SMT. T.B. RAMANI, GOVT. PLEADER. R4 BY ADV. SRI.K.SASIKUMAR

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/03/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J.

¶19

W.P.(C) No. 7121 OF 2007

¶20

Dated this the 15^th day of March, 2007

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

Considering the grounds raised in the Writ Petition and the submissions made before me by Sri.P.Haridas, counsel for the petitioner, Sri.K. Sasikumar, Standing Counsel for the Panchayat and the learned Government Pleader for respondents 1, 2 and 3, I am of the view that consideration of justice and the principle that final quietus must be given to disputes over property especially when they are between citizens and local authority, directions can be issued to the 2^nd respondent to conduct a survey of the property belonging to the petitioner covered by Ext.P1 deed in the light of Exts.P2, P3 and all other relevant materials. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of issuing the following directions:

¶23

The 2^nd respondent is directed to conduct a measurement of the petitioner's property covered by Ext.P1 with notice to the 4^th respondent. Measurement will be conducted by him in accordance with law and property covered by Ext.P1, which is not in dispute will be identified and shown in a plan to be prepared by him. Necessary charges for survey and measurement will be borne by the petitioner. Measurement as directed above shall be completed within three months of receiving copy

¶24

WPC No. 7121/2006

¶25

¶26

of this judgment. The 2^nd respondent will furnish a copy of the sketch to be prepared by him on the basis of the measurement to the Panchayat also so that if necessary Panchayat can take further action.

¶27

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE

¶28

btt

¶29

WPC No. 7121/2006

¶30

A.J.Varghese v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.J.Varghese v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.D.Sebastian Vs State of Kerala

Unnikrishnan Vs Paravoor Muncipality

Devassia Vs the Kattappana Grama Panchayath

E.a.Ruswelt @ Tomy Vs the Narakkal Grama Panchayath

K. Muhammed Kutty Vs Kottakkal Grama Panchayat

P.N.Retnakumari Vs Kochi Corporation