Disposed

M/S a.v.G.Motores Limited Kottayam v. the Assistant Commissioner, Spl.Circle, Commercial Taxes

Kerala HC22 Nov 2016WP(C)/37369/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition challenging proceedings to cut mango and other trees on the petitioner's property. The court confirmed that the interim stay extended under an earlier order is now absolute subject to the proviso that if any danger arises, the sole responsibility lies with the petitioner, allowing respondents to take appropriate steps thereafter.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; interim order dated 22.11.2016 made absolute with responsibility for danger on petitioner.

M/S a.v.G.Motores Limited Kottayam Vs the Assistant… — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 30TH PHALGUNA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 37360 OF 2016

¶5

PETITIONER/S:

¶6

G.SURENDRAN
AGED 62 YEARS
S/O GANGADHARAN, KANNOTTU VEEDU,MEKKEPATTAKUDY,
KAMUKINKODU,KODANGAVILA PO.

¶7

BY ADV SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI

¶8

RESPONDENT/S:

¶9

1 THE DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATS THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695001.

¶10

2 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATS THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695001.

¶11

3 THE PANCHAYAT ASSISTANT DIRECTOR THE OFFICE OF THE PANCHAYAT ASSISTANT DIRECTOR,CIVIL STATION, 4TH FLOOR, KUDAPPANAKUNNU

¶12

POST,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695043.

¶13

4 THE SECRETARY SPECIAL GRADE ATHIYANNOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT,KAMUKINKODU, KODANGAVILA PO,NEYYATINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695123.

¶14

5 P. VIJAYAN USHA BHAVAN, MEKKEPATTAKUDY,KAMUKINKODU, KODANGAVILA PO,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695123.

¶15

6 THE SECRETARY OMBUDSMAN FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695001.

¶16

BY ADV SRI.POOVAPPALLY M.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

¶17

OTHER PRESENT:

¶18

SRI.K.M.FAISAL, GP

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
21.03.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

WP(C) NO. 37360 OF 2016

¶21

¶22

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.

¶23

------------------------------

¶24

W.P.(C).No. 37360 Of 2016

¶25

Dated this the 21^st day of March, 2023

¶26

J U D G M E N T

¶27

The above writ petition is filed with the following

¶28

prayers:

¶29

i) Call for records leading to Ext.P13 and quash Exts.P8, P9 and P11 to P13 by a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction;

¶30

ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents 1 to 4 and 6 not to direct the petitioner to cut and remove the Mango tree or the branches of any other tree in the property comprised in Ext.P1;

¶31

iii)Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the first respondent to dispose of Ext.P3 forthwith;

¶32

iv) Stay all further proceedings pursuant to Eats P12 and P13, until the disposal of the Writ Petition;

¶33

v) Award costs and

¶34

vi) Any other reliefs this Hon'ble Court deems fit..(SIC)

¶35

The main challenge is against Ext.P8, P9, P11 to

¶36

P13. According to the petitioner, the petitioner and his

¶37

son are the absolute owners in possession of 2 cents of

¶38

WP(C) NO. 37360 OF 2016

¶39

¶40

property comprised in Ext.P1. The petitioner is residing therein with his family. Ext.P2 is the ration card of the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that, the 5^th respondent is causing all sort problems in the peaceful living of the petitioner and his family members in the above property. It is stated that, at his behest a coconut was cut and removed. Now proceedings have been issued to cut and remove a mango tree and the branches of another tree standing on the petitioner's property. It is the case of the petitioner that, the location of the same in no way causes any hazard to the 5^th respondent. But as per the impugned order, there is a direction to cut and remove the mango tree and the branches of another tree. Aggrieved by the same, this Writ Petition is filed.

¶41

There is no representation for the petitioner and the respondents.

¶42

When this came up for consideration on 22.11.2016, this court passed the following order.

¶43

WP(C) NO. 37360 OF 2016

¶44

¶45

“Admit.

¶46

Government Pleader takes notice for R1 to R3. Issue notice to R4 to R6.

¶47

There shall be an interim stay of Exts. P12 and P13 for a period of one month. However, if any danger is caused the responsibility will be solely on the petitioner.”

¶48

Above interim order is seen extended until further orders on 22.06.2017. When this court passed the above Interim order, it is made clear that, if any danger is caused, the responsibility will be solely on the petitioner.

¶49

In the light of the above interim order, this writ petition can be closed. If any danger is caused, the responsibility will be on the petitioner. If there is any fresh cause of action, the respondents are free to take

¶50

appropriate steps in accordance with law, with notice to the petitioner.

¶51

Therefore this writ petition is disposed of with the above observation and making the interim order dated 22.11.2016 absolute.

¶52

Sd/-

¶53

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE

¶54

¶55

WP(C) NO. 37360 OF 2016

¶56

¶57

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 37360/2016

¶58

PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 26.10.1983.
EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE RATION CARD OF THE
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
19.10.2016 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATS.
EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED
26.6.2008 ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY (SPECIAL
GRADE) ATHIYANNUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT.
EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION CERTIFICATE.
EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 5.3.2013 WAS
ISSUED BY THE SUB JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
EXHIBIT P7TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING DATED 17.2.2016.
EXHIBIT P8TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING DATED 29.3.2016.
EXHIBIT P9TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING DATED 5.5.2016
ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY ATHIYANNUR GRAMA
PANCHAYAT.
EXHIBIT P10TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
23.5.2016 DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATS,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
EXHIBIT P11TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 26.9.2016 FROM
THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATS,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
EXHIBIT P12TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING DATED 4.11.2016
FROM THE SECRETARY, ATHIYANNUR GRAMA
PANCHAYAT.
EXHIBIT P13TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 1.9.2016 PASSED
BY THE OMBUDSMAN LOCAL SELF GOVERMENT
INSTITUTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
EXHIBIT P14TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
31.5.2003 FILED BY THE LOCAL PEOPLE BEFORE
THE SECRETARY, ATHIYANNUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT.

¶59

RESPONDENT EXHIBITS NIL

¶60

 //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

M/S a.v.G.Motores Limited Kottayam v. the Assistant Commissioner, Spl.Circle, Commercial Taxes

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S a.v.G.Motores Limited Kottayam v. the Assistant Commissioner, Spl.Circle, Commercial Taxes

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Punjab National Bank Vs Debts Recovery Tribunal and Others

The Kerala State Co. Operative Federation for Fisheries Development Ltd. Vs Pd.Raphael

T.C. John Vs Commercial Tax Officer

Sanobar.K.K Vs the Village Officer

Karthik Constructions Vs Union Bank of India

Jibimol J.P. Vs the Authorised Officer, Chief Manager (Advances), Sbt