The petitioner challenged an order directing him to file a civil suit regarding a boundary wall allegedly blocking a right of way. The High Court found no need for interim orders as the notice period for filing a suit had elapsed and dismissed the writ petition.
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. 624 of 2009(Y) ------------------------
PETITIONER(S): ---------------
SREEKANTAN NAIR, S/O.KRISHNA PILLAI KRISHNA BHAVAN, H.NO.AP.1/304(OLD) AP 8/307 (NEW), ARUVIKKARA PO., IRUMPA NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER
RESPONDENT(S): ---------------
ARUVIKKARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, ARFUVIKKARA PO., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
ADV. SRI.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN FOR R1 SRI.DEEPU LAL MOHAN FOR R1 SRI.NINU M.DAS FOR R1 SMT.LEENA MURALI FOR R1
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.624 of 2009
==================
Dated this the 12th day of February, 2009 J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is aggrieved by the respondent-Panchayat constructing a boundary wall to the property of the Panchayat, which, according to the petitioner, would block the petitioner's right of way to his property adjacent to the Panchayat's property. The petitioner approached the Ombudsman for Local Self Government Institutions, who by Ext.P4 order, relegated the petitioner to a civil suit. The petitioner is challenging that order in this original petition.
In so far as the petitioner's claim for right of way is on the basis of easement, the petitioner has to establish his right in a civil suit and therefore, I do not find any infirmity whatsoever in Ext.P4 order of the Ombudsman. Now the petitioner submits that he has already issued Ext.P5 notice under Section 249 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act on 5.1.2009 for filing a suit and he may be given some time to approach the civil court. Learned counsel for the Panchayat submits that Ext.P5 notice was received by the Panchayat on 7.1.2009. Therefore, the notice period is already over. In the above circumstances, there is no impediment for the petitioner to file a suit now and get interim orders in that suit. Therefore, no further orders are necessary in this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
sdk+
Sd/S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
///True copy///
P.A. to Judge
2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition succeeds where the petitioner claims to have already issued a summons under Section 249 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act requesting the filing of a suit.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
SREEKANTAN NAIR
ARUVIKKARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT
S.SIRI JAGAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
