Petitioners challenged construction by the fourth respondent. The first respondent corporation regularized the dispute. Court closed writ petition as reliefs became infructuous.
Writ petition is closed as the reliefs prayed for have become infructuous due to regularization of construction.
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 SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA
MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/30TH KARTHIKA, 1938
WP(C).No. 28404 of 2007 (F)
PETITIONER(S) :
1. THILOTHAMA N.N., W/O. SREEDHARAN, VELIYIL HOUSE, PADIVATTAM, EDAPPALLY P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
2. DEEPU V.R., VELIYIL HOUSE, PADIVATTAM, EDAPPALLY P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS. SRI.M.P.ASHOK KUMAR SRI.N.N.THILOTHA
RESPONDENT(S) :
1. THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF COCHIN, ERNAKULAM.
2. THE ASSISTANT EXCISE COMMISSIONER, ERNAKULAM.
3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
4. SRI. K.S.VIJAYAN, KANNAMBALLIL HOUSE, PADIVATTAM, EDAPPALLY P.O., ERNAKULAM.
5. THE SENIOR TOWN PLANNER (VIGILANCE), LOCAL SELF GOVT. DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21-11-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 28404 of 2007 (F)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS & ANNEXURES :
ANNEXURE I: TRUE COPY OF CONSENT LETTER DATED 09.03.2010
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :
EXHIBIT R4(A): TRUE COPY OF AGREEMENT DATED 04.09.2004 EXECUTED BY 1ST PETITIONER IN FAVOUR OF 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT R4(B): TRUE COPY OF OCCUPANCY CERTIFICATE DATED 02.05.2005.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A.TO JUDGE.
Msd.
P.V.ASHA, J.
W.P(C) No.28404 of 2007-F
Dated this the 21st day of November, 2016
JUDGMENT
The main grievance of the petitioners when the writ petition was filed was against the construction being carried out by the 4th respondent. Subsequent to the filing of the writ petition, the 1st petitioner who is the owner of the adjacent property, withdrew from the writ petition.
In the above circumstances, the reliefs prayed for by the writ petitioner have become infructuous. It is open to the petitioner to challenge the orders of regularisation, in case he is aggrieved, and to move appropriate proceedings, if permissible in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the writ petition is closed.
Sd/-
(P.V.ASHA, JUDGE)
rtr/
THILOTHAMA N.N.
DEEPU V.R.
THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF COCHIN
THE ASSISTANT EXCISE COMMISSIONER
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
SRI. K.S.VIJAYAN
P.V.ASHA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
