Disposed

Faizal K M v. Assistant Executive Engineer

Kerala HC9 Jun 2016WP(C)/1664/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition filed by an apartment purchaser claiming denial of individual electricity connection. The court directed the builder to take steps to obtain a building connection within three months, warned of disconnection if failed, and kept the specific claim open.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the builder (Additional 2nd Respondent) to obtain power connection within three months; warning of disconnection if failed; claim kept open pending builder's action.

Faizal K M Vs Assistant Executive Engineer — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE 2016/19TH JYAISHTA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 1664 of 2013 (G)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

FAIZAL K.M., AGED 40, S/O. K.B. MOHAMADALI, C.C.NO.13/763, THAYKAVU ROAD, KARUVELIPADY, KOCHI-5, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.M.H.HANIS.

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, THOPPUMPADY, KOCHI-682 005.

¶11

ADDL. R2 IMPLEADED

¶12

2. C.A. NAZER, FIFA TOWERS, NEAR XL HOTEL, PANAYAPPILLY, FORT KOCHI.

¶13

*** ADDL. R2 IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER JUDGMENT DATED 09/06/2016 .**

¶14

R1 BY ADV. SRI.SAJEEVKUMAR K.GOPAL, SC. ADDL. R2 BY ADV. SRI.A.A. ZIYAD RAHMAN.

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

rs.

¶17

WP(C).No. 1664 of 2013 (G)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-

¶20

EXT.P1 COPY OF THE CONFIRMATION OF SALE IN DRC NO.1597 IN O.A. NO.382/2003.

¶21

EXT.P2 COPY OF THE CONFIRMATION OF SALE IN DRC NO.1587 IN O.A. NO.381/2003.

¶22

EXT.P3 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 16/09/2011 OF THE RESPONDENT.

¶23

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

rs.

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J.

¶28

W.P.(C).No.1664 of 2013

¶29

Dated this the 9^th day of June, 2016

¶30

J U D G M E N T

¶31

The petitioner had purchased two apartments in the third floor of FIFA Tower, Panayappally, Kochi-2 in an auction conducted by the Recovery Officer attached to the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam. The complaint of the petitioner is that, though power connections are provided to various other flats in the building, the petitioner is not provided with power connection and accordingly this writ petition is filed for a direction to the respondent to provide electric connection to flat Nos.A & B in the third floor of FIFA Tower, which was purchased by the petitioner.

¶32

Sri.C.A.Nazer, Fifa Towers, Near XL Hotel, Panayappilly, Fort Kochi, (petitioner in W.P.(C).No.6745/2013) who is the builder, is suo motu impleaded as additional 2^nd respondent in the writ petition. Adv.Sri.A.A.Ziyad Rahman appears on behalf of the additional 2^nd respondent.

¶33

A statement has been filed by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent inter alia stating that FIFA Tower is a 7 storied building with different apartments. It is not possible to give independent connection to each flat of a seven storied building. The Board can give connection only to the building by laying underground cable with transformer on the applicant submitting

¶34

W.P.(C).No.1664 of 2013

¶35

¶36

various documents as stated in paragraph 2 thereof.

¶37

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though separate metres have been fixed for different apartments and power connection is given, the petitioner alone was not given the power connection so far.

¶38

The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Board submits that the builder had not taken any steps for installing the transformer and applying for proper connection. The power connection was given for construction of the building, which is being misutilised and separate connections are given by the builder to different apartments. Under normal circumstances, the power connection to the entire building could be disconnected. But disconnection was not done on account of an interim order passed by this Court in W.P.(C).No.6745 of 2013.

¶39

The learned counsel for the petitioner also relies upon the report of the Advocate Commissioner to indicate that all other flats had been given power connection.

¶40

While the matter was being heard, the learned counsel for the additional 2^nd respondent, submits that the builder is taking all necessary steps to obtain electricity connection for the said building, and if necessary, by installing transformer and by providing other facilities.

¶41

Having regard to the aforesaid factual situation, I am of the

¶42

W.P.(C).No.1664 of 2013

¶43

¶44

view that this writ petition can be disposed of with the following directions to enable the petitioner to get power connection :

¶45

The additional 2^nd respondent is granted three months' time to take all necessary steps for obtaining power connection for the building in question after completing all necessary formalities as per the applicable Rules.

¶46

If the power connection is not obtained as stated above, it shall be open for the respondent Board to dismantle the entire connection from the apartment.

¶47

In regard to the claim of the petitioner, the issue is kept open to be decided, if no steps are taken by the builder in this regard.

¶48

Sd/-

¶49

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE.

¶50

Faizal K M v. Assistant Executive Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Faizal K M v. Assistant Executive Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Thomsons Specialty Packagings and Exports (India) Ltd. Vs State Bank of Travancore

Jagadeesh.P.K. Vs the Addl.District Magistrate

Ewv.Sr.Molly Augustine Vs the Kerala State Electricity Board

Psn Educational and Charitable Trust Vs the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner

V.C.Joy Vs Kerala State Electricity Board Rep.by Its Secretary

M/S. Mez Projects and Ventures Vs Kerala State Electricity Board