Petitioner challenged the Munsiff's Court's order appointing an advocate commissioner and the plaint filed by individual residents under Section 91 CPC. The High Court held that merits of pipe replacement and maintenance issues require adjudication in the Civil Court.
Disposed by directing the petitioner to approach the Civil Court for appropriate reliefs.
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 THE AG.CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN &
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE
TUESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2014/11TH AGRAHAYANA, 1936
OP(C).No. 1750 of 2013 (O)
PETITIONER(S):
M/S.SHRIRAM EPC LIMITED IB SIGAPPI ACHI BUILDING, 18/3 RUKMINI LAKSHMIPAGHY SALAI, (MARSHALS ROAD), EGMORE CHENNAI - 600008, REPRESENTED BY R. SRIDHARAN VICE PRESIDENT, SHRIRAM EPC LIMITED IB SIGAPPI ACHI BUILDING, 18/3 RUKMINI LAKSHMIPATHY SALAI, (MARSHALS ROAD), EGMORE CHENNAI - 600 008.
BY ADVS.SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER (SR.)
SRI.JOHN JOSEPH VETTIKAD
SRI.ANEESH JOSEPH
SMT.DENNIS VARGHESE
RESPONDENT(S):
1. JAMES.M. S/O. MATHAI, PANAKKAL HOUSE, KEEZHAPARAMBA AMSOM DESOM P.O. VALILLAPUZHA VIA, AREEKODE -673 369.
2. P.P. HAMSAKOYA S/O. MAMMED KOYA, BAITHUL FATHIMA, MANNARKUNNU PARAMBA CHEVAYUR AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE -673 017.
3. CALICUT MUNICIPAL CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CORPORATION OFFICE KOZHIKODE - 673 032.
4. KERALA SUSTAINABLE URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (KSUDPP KOZHIKODE CORPORATION, CALICUT - 32 (REPRESENTED BY ITS PROJECT MANAGER PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION UNIT)
5. KERALA WATER AUTHORITY PROJECT DIVISION, KOZHIKODE REPRESENTED BY THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER KWA KOZHIKODE - 673 021. R1 & 2 BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS ANTONY R3 BY SRI.K.D.BABU,SC,KOZHIKODE CORPORATION R5 BY SRI.GEORGE MATHEW, SC, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02-12-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP(C).No. 1750 of 2013 (O)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT-P1-TRUE COPY OF THE APPROVAL LETTER DATED 24/11/2011 ISSUED BY THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY. EXHIBIT-P2-TRUE COPY OF THE APPROVAL LETTER DATED 14/12/2012 ISSUED BY THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY. EXHIBIT-P3-TRUE COPY OF THE APPROVAL LETTER DATED 14/12/2012 ISSUED BY THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY.
EXHIBIT-P4-TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF THREE COMPANIES AFTER TESTING.
EXHIBIT-P5-TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF THREE COMPANIES AFTER TESTING.
EXHIBIT-P6-TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF THREE COMPANIES AFTER TESTING.
EXHIBIT-P7-TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S 4/2013 DATED 07/01/2013. EXHIBITP-P8-TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FLED BY THE RESPONDENTS NO. 1 AND 2 TO APPOINT ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER DATED 07/01/2013. EXHIBIT-P9-TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER APPOINTING ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER EXHIBIT-P10-TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE KERALA WATER AUTHORITY IN O.S 4/2013.
EXHIBIT P11: COPY OF APPLICATION IN I.A.NO.133/2013 IN O.S.NO.4/2013 OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, KOZHIKODE, ALONG WITH ORDER WRITTEN ON THE APPLICATION DATED 7.1.2013.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
NIL
/TRUE COPY/
PS TO JUDGE
ASHOK BHUSHAN, Ag.CJ & A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J
O.P(C).No. 1750 of 2013
Dated this the 2nd December, 2014 JUDGMENT
Shaffique, J.
This Original Petition is filed for a writ of certiorari to quash Exhibits P7 and P9. Exhibit P7 is the plaint in O.S.No.4 of 2013 pending before the Munsiff's Court, Kozhikode. The suit was filed by respondents 1 and 2 invoking Section 91 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Petitioner, proceeding on the basis of that no leave was granted, has filed this Writ Petition challenging Exhibit P9 order passed by the Munsiff's Court appointing an Advocate-Commission. The respondents, who appeared before the learned Single Judge submitted that leave has already been granted by the Court invoking Section 91 C.P.C. Hence, the Original Petition was amended challenging the order in I.A.No.133/2013, granting leave to institute the suit.
2
OP(C).1750/13
pipes are permitted to remain as it is, it will again deteriorate. That apart, it is contended that the pipes laid by the petitioner were in conformity with the specifications as envisaged by the Project Implementing Agency and therefore, there is no merit in the contention of respondents 1 and 2. The petitioner has also challenged Exhibit P7, the plaint in O.S.No.4 of 2013 pending before the Munsiff's Court and seeks for quashing the said suit as not maintainable. Apparently, these are all matters to be considered by the Munsiff's Court in a proper application to be filed by the petitioner.
OP(C).1750/13 3
visual workmanship and finish and found unsatisfactory. Further, on going through the report submitted by the Advocate-Commission and further hearing the learned counsel on both sides, it was observed that as larger public interest is involved in the instant suit, it is only appropriate that the Original Petition be heard by a Bench hearing Public Interest Litigation cases.
4
OP(C).1750/13
In the result, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing
the petitioner to approach the Civil Court for appropriate reliefs. It is made clear that the petitioner shall be entitled
to take all contentions as permissible under law in this regard.
ASHOK BHUSHAN ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
A.M.SHAFFIQUE JUDGE
vgs4/12/14
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Writ Petition seeking quashing of the plaint and the order appointing a civil court is maintainable at this stage.
Whether this Court, as a public interest litigation bench, should adjudicate merits of the suit pending before the Munsiff's Court.
M/s. Shriram EPC Limited
James M.
P.P. Hamsakoya
Calicut Municipal Corporation
Kerala Sustainable Urban Development Project
Kerala Water Authority
Ashok Bhushan
A.M. Shaffique
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
