Petitioner, denied an ownership certificate by the Panchayat, contended he renovated rather than demolished his original building. This court noted the record deletion and structure change, refused interference, and dismissed the writ petition.
Petitioner is denied an ownership certificate; writ petition dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN
THURSDAY, THE 12TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 23RD MAGHA 1930
WP(C).No. 1686 of 2009(A)
PETITIONER:
CHOMBALAN SURENDRAN, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O. KANNAN, GIRIJA NIVAS, P.O. KOTTAYAMPOZHIL, KANNUR DISTRICT.
MR.C.KHALID, ADVOCATE. MR.N.GOPINATHA PANICKER, ADVOCATE. MR.R.O.MUHAMED SHEMEEM, ADVOCATE. MR.T.P.SAJID, ADVOCATE. MS.M.A.SULFIA, ADVOCATE. MS.NAMITHA JYOTHISH, ADVOCATE.
RESPONDENT:
THE SECRETARY, MUZHAPILANGAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH, P.O. MUZHAPPILANGAD, KANNUR DISTRICT.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
W.P.(C)No.1686 OF 2009
Dated this the 12th day of February, 2009
JUDGMENT
The petitioner owns a building. He applied to the respondent for issue of an ownership certificate. It was rejected by Ext.P8 order on the ground that the petitioner had demolished the original building bearing No.VI/261 and constructed a new building without obtaining any permit from the Panchayat. According to the Panchayat, the original building, on demolition, had been deleted from the records of the Panchayat and therefore, no ownership certificate for the building No.VI/261 can be issued to the petitioner. Although the petitioner would submit that he had not demolished the original building but only renovated the same, it is an undisputed fact that the original building had only a tiled roof and the present building has a concrete roof. Further the petitioner could not satisfy me that the finding in Ext.P8 that the original building has been removed from the records of the Panchayat is not correct.
In the above circumstances, I am not inclined to interfere
W.P.(c)No.1686/09
2
with Ext.P8. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. However, this is without prejudice to other remedies of the petitioner to get regularisation of the construction of the building.
S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
Acd
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to interfere with the impugned order rejecting the application for issue of an ownership certificate due to demolition and reconstruction without a permit.
CHOMBALAN SURENDRAN
THE SECRETARY, MUZHAPILANGAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH
S. SIRI JAGAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
