Partly allowed

Sivanandhan T.P v. the Corporation of Kochi

Kerala HC16 Nov 2019WP(C)/3769/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In joint hearing of writs challenging unauthorized construction and seeking issuance of occupancy certificate, the Court held the Secretary acted contrary to statutory scheme by obtaining a report from a single Engineer instead of the mandated Technical Expert Committee. The Court directed reference to the Committee and deferred issuance of completion certificate pending the appeal before the Trib

What did the court decide?

WP(C) 3769/2018 directed to refer complaint to Technical Expert Committee under KMB Rules Rule 11A; WP(C) 11381/2018 disposed of directing consideration after stay on LSGT appeal lifts and Rule compli

Sivanandhan T.P Vs the Corporation of Kochi — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶5

SATURDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 25TH KARTHIKA, 1941

¶6

WP(C).No.3769 OF 2018(U)

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

SIVANANDHAN T.P, AGED 65 YEARS S/O.LATE K.K.PADMANABHAN,NJRA - 215, AYILLYAM HOUSE,NORTH JANATHA, ERROR VASUDEVA ROAD,PALARTIVATTAM, ERNAKULAM 682 025.

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.C.RAJENDRAN SRI.B.K.GOPALAKRISHNAN

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

1 THE CORPORATION OF KOCHI COCHIN CORPORATION OFFICE ERNAKULAM 682 011, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

¶12

2 THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER CORPORATION OF KOCHI ZOONAL OFFICE, EDAPPALLY, ERNAKULAM - 682 025.

¶13

3 SHAILA BEEVI, W/O.SHIHABUDEEN,PUTHENVILA HOUSE, REGAL VALANCIA,FLAT NO.3E ELAVANKATTU NAGAR,THRIKKAKKARA P.O., KAKKANAD 682 021.

¶14

4 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER PALARIVATTAM POLICE STATION, PALARIVATTAM,ERNAKULAM KOCHI 682 025.

¶15

*5 ADDL.R5 THE GEOLOGIST DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, DISTRICT OFFICE, ERNAKULAM. (ADDL.R5 IS IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DATED 29/06/2018 IN IA.7927/2018)

¶16

*6 ADDL.R6 SHIHABUDEEN HUSBAND OF SHYLABEEVI, PUTHENVILA HOUSE, REGAL VALANCIA, FLAT NO.3E, ELAVANKATTU NAGAR, THRIKKAKKARA P.O., KAKKANAD-682021 (NOW DOING HOTEL BUSINESS IN SOUDI ARABIA, PH.00966505890257) (ADDL.R6 IS IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DATED 11/10/2018 IN IA.NO.09/2018)

¶17

WPC 3769&11381/18

¶18

¶19

R1 BY SRI.V.S.SREEJITH,SC,COCHIN CORPORATION R1 BY ADV. SRI.A.B.JALEEL R1 BY ADV. SRI.V.S.SREEJITH, SC, COCHIN CORPORATION R3 BY ADV. SRI.J.JAYAKUMAR R3 BY ADV. SMT.MINI.V.A. R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER GP S.L.SYLAJA

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16.11.2019, ALONG WITH WP(C).11381/2018(W), THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WPC 3769&11381/18

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶25

PRESENT

¶26

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶27

SATURDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 25TH KARTHIKA, 1941

¶28

WP(C).No.11381 OF 2018

¶29

PETITIONER/S:

¶30

SHAILA BEEVI, AGED 48, W/O.SHIHABUDEEN, PUTHENPURA VEEDU, CHEMMANNUR, PUNALOOR, C/O.RAHMATH SHAMSUDEEN, VASANT NAGAR, ADAMATPADAM, EROOR VASUDEV ROAD, KALOOR, KOCHI-682017.

¶31

BY ADV. SRI.A.B.JALEEL BY SHAILA BEEVI(PARTY IN PERSON)

¶32

RESPONDENT/S:

¶33

1 THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF KOCHI COCHIN CORPORATION OFFICE, ERNAKULAM-682011.

¶34

2 THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER CORPORATION OF KOCHI, ZONAL OFFICE, EDAPPALLY, PIN-682025.

¶35

3 T.P.SHIVANANDAN, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, RESIDING AT ADAMATPADAM, EROOR VASUDEV ROAD, VASANTH NAGAR, KALOOR, KOCHI-682017.

¶36

R1 BY SRI.P.K.SOYUZ,SC,COCHIN CORPORATION R1 BY ADV. ANITHA MATHA MUTHIRENTHY ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER

¶37

R3 BY ADV. SRI.B.K.GOPALAKRISHNAN

¶38

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16.11.2019, ALONG WITH WP(C).3769/2018(U), THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WPC 3769&11381/18

JUDGMENT

Among these two writ petitions I am

¶43

considering together, WP(C)No.3769/2018 has

¶44

been filed by Sri.Sivanandhan alleging that the

¶45

3^rd respondent-Smt.Shailabeevi is making a construction in contravention of law and without leaving sufficient setback, thus causing detriment and damage to his property and the building situated thereon.

¶46

According to Sri.Sivanandhan,

¶47

Smt.Shailabeevi is continuing with the

¶48

construction in haste because her building

¶49

permit has expired on 15.02.2018 and he has

¶50

thus prayed as under:

¶51

i) To issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondent No.1 and 2 to stop the continuance of the illegal construction with the help of the 4^th respondent as per Section 408 of the Municipality Act, 1994.

¶52

ii)To issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ, order or direction, directing the 2^nd respondent to lock the compound of the building and the building and entrust the key to the 1^st respondent.

¶53

iii) To issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ, order or direction, directing

¶54

WPC 3769&11381/18

¶55

¶56

the 1^st respondent not to renew the building permit which expires on 15.02.2018.

¶57

iv)To issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ, order or direction, directing the 1^st respondent not to issue the completion certificate of the building and not to issue the occupancy certificate to the 3^rd respondent. 3. While so, Smt.Shailabeevi filed

¶58

WP(C)No.11381/2018 asserting that the

¶59

construction is complete and that the Secretary of the Corporation is, therefore, obligated to

¶60

issue an Occupancy Certificate for the same and

¶61

also to number it. The pleadings show that she

¶62

was constrained to approach this Court by filing this writ petition because, instead of granting the request made by her before the Secretary, the said Authority issued Ext.P4 memo asking her to stop the construction on the

¶63

ground that she has violated the provisions of

¶64

Rules 20(6) and 20(7) of the Kerala

¶65

Municipality Building Rules (KMB Rules for short). Smt.Shailabeevi submits that Ext.P4 is incompetent because, on an earlier occasion,

¶66

¶67

WPC 3769&11381/18

¶68

the Secretary has issued Ext.P8 order, dated

¶69

11.01.2018, finding all the afore allegations to be untenable and that Ext.P4 has been issued merely based on the unsubstantiated allegations made by Sri.Sivanandhan. She, therefore, prays that Ext.P4 be set aside and the Secretary of

¶70

the Corporation be directed to issue the Completion Certificate for the building, as requested in Ext.P2 application.

¶71

I have heard Sri.C.Rajendran and

¶72

Sri.B.K.Gopalakrishnan-learned counsel

¶73

appearing for Sri.Sivanandhan in these two cases; Smt.V.A.Mini-learned counsel appearing

¶74

for Smt.Shailabeevi and Sri.P.K.Zoyus and Sri.V.S.Sreejith-learned Standing Counsel

¶75

appearing for Kochi Corporation in these cases.

¶76

As is ineluctable from the afore

¶77

narrative, Sri.Sivanandhan alleges that

¶78

Smt.Shailabeevi is making the construction in

¶79

such a manner so as to cause detriment and

¶80

¶81

WPC 3769&11381/18

¶82

damage to his property and the building

¶83

thereon; and therefore, prays that such construction be stopped. On the contrary, Smt.Shailabeevi asserts that she has made the construction strictly in accordance with the approved building plan and permit and that if any damage has been caused to the property of Sri.Sivanandhan, it is only on account of his own transgressions in having made his construction without leaving the setback as per the KMB Rules.

¶84

The pleadings on record would indicate further that the parties were ready to have the alleged damage caused to Sri.Sivanandhan’s property and building assessed by a proper Committee and this is evident from the fact that the Secretary of the Corporation had issued a proceedings, namely Ext.R3(C), wherein such a consent has been recorded. In fact, it also transpires that pursuant to Ext.R3(c), a

¶85

¶86

WPC 3769&11381/18

¶87

Committee, consisting of an Engineer from the

¶88

Trichur Engineering College had inspected the building of Sri.Sivanandhan and had recommended

¶89

that he is entitled to an amount of Rs.54,000/-

¶90

towards total compensation. Smt.Shailabeevi

¶91

says that thus the provisions of the KMB Rules

¶92

with respect to the allegations of

¶93

Sri.Sivanandhan have been complied with and

¶94

therefore, that no further orders may be issued in WP(C)No.3769/2018.

¶95

Sri.C.Rajendran-learned counsel appearing for Sri.Sivanandhan in WP(C)No.3769/2018, that even

¶96

though the parties had agreed that a competent expert Committee, as per the provisions of Rule 11A of the KMB Rules, can be allowed to inspect

¶97

and make their recommendations, what has been

¶98

done by the Secretary is to engage the services

¶99

of an Engineer from the Trichur Engineering College and alleges that this is contrary to

¶100

WPC 3769&11381/18

¶101

¶102

the imperative statutory provisions; and

¶103

consequently, asserts that Ext.R3(c) proceedings and Ext.R3(b) report are both incompetent without legal basis. I further notice that it is the specific submission of

¶104

Sri.C.Rajendran that if this Court is so

¶105

inclined, a Technical Expert Committee as per Rule 11A of the KMB Rules may be directed to inspect his client’s property and that if this is done, he would be satisfied since his primary complaint against Smt.Shailabeevi is

¶106

that she has made the construction without

¶107

regard to the safety of the neighboring properties.

¶108

learned counsel for Smt.Shailabeevi, as to her submissions on the suggestion afore made by

¶109

Sri.Rajendran, to which she submitted that

¶110

since Sri.Sivanandhan had agreed to the course ordered in Ext.P3 proceedings of the Secretary

¶111

WPC 3769&11381/18

¶112

¶113

and since he has not challenged the report of

¶114

the expert obtained pursuant to it, he cannot be now allowed to resile from it and seek that another Committee inspect his property and file a fresh report. She then submitted that her client’s building has been left without being numbered indefinitely solely on account of the pendency of these writ petitions and therefore, prays that the Secretary of the Corporation may be directed to number the same immediately.

¶115

Sri.B.K.Gopalakrishnan-learned counsel

¶116

appearing for Sri.Sivanandhan in

¶117

WP(C)No.11381/2018 submits that the Corporation has, in fact, found that the construction of Smt.Shailabeevi is unauthorized on various grounds and not merely for the reasons stated in Ext.P4 in this writ petition; and he refers to Ext.R3(b) therein to show that various other violations have been noticed against the said construction. He says that this order has been

¶118

¶119

WPC 3769&11381/18

¶120

already challenged by Smt.Shailabeevi before

¶121

the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions and that it has been stayed and

¶122

then prays that unless the said proceedings are

¶123

completed, this Court may not direct the Secretary of the Corporation to regularise her construction or to number it.

¶124

In response to this, Smt.Mini submits that it is true that her client has approached the Tribunal against the order and asserts that since it has been stayed, there is nothing to

¶125

stop the Secretary from numbering the building adding that a provisional number has already been issued.

¶126

I have carefully assessed the afore

¶127

dialectical stands of the parties, as voiced by their learned counsel as above since I cannot

¶128

find Ext.R3(c) proceedings and Ext.R3(b) report in WP(C)No.3769/2018 to be in consonance with Rule 11A of the KMB Rules. This is because as

¶129

¶130

WPC 3769&11381/18

¶131

per sub Rule 5 of the said Rule, when a

¶132

complaint is received by the Secretary with respect to the damage caused to a building on

¶133

account of an ongoing construction, he is obliged to place it before the Technical Expert Committee constituted by the Government under

¶134

sub Rule 12 of the said Rule. However, in this case, instead of doing so, the Secretary obtained a report from an Engineer of the Thrissur Engineering College, because the parties had agreed to such course. Since the KMB Rules provide for a statutory mechanism in such situation, I cannot approve the action of the Secretary, even if the parties had agreed to it, particularly since nothing has been placed on record to show the competence of the Engineer who had been engaged by the Secretary.

¶135

Hence, the fact that the report of such

¶136

Engineer has not been challenged by Sri.Sivanandhan would be of no consequence,

¶137

¶138

WPC 3769&11381/18

¶139

since the same is not obtained under the

¶140

statutory scheme but traversing beyond it, which the Secretary could not do as per law.

¶141

I am, therefore, certainly of the view

¶142

that the Technical Expert Committee constituted by the Government under Section 11A of the KMB Rules must now look into the matter and file a report before the Secretary. This is more so because the said Committee is comprised of the Secretary of the Corporation, an Engineer of the Corporation and two experts-one in Structural Engineering and the other in Geotechnical Engineering. Obviously, this kind of an expert Committee cannot be substituted by an Engineer, who has been relied upon by the Secretary of the Corporation.

¶143

In the afore circumstances and above

¶144

perspective, I deem it appropriate to order

¶145

these writ petitions in the following manner:

WPC 3769&11381/18

limited extent of directing the Secretary to

¶150

refer the complaint of Sri.Sivanandhan to the Technical Expert Committee, constituted by the Government for Corporation of Kochi, in terms of Rule 11A of the KMB Rules, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy

¶151

of this judgment. The said Committee, on receipt of this requisition, will complete the processes as are required under the KMB Rules and furnish their report and recommendations to

¶152

the Secretary of the Corporation, after affording necessary opportunity to the parties, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than three months from the date on which they receive such requisition from the Secretary. The Secretary, on receipt of the report from the Technical Expert Committee, will take necessary steps as are required under law with respect to the compensation and ensure that all such steps are completed without any delay

WPC 3769&11381/18

thereafter.

directing the Secretary of the Corporation to consider the application of the petitionerSmt.Shailabeevi, after her statutory appeal preferred against Ext.R3(b) before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions is disposed of and subject to such orders and after verifying and confirming that the construction abides by the Kerala Municipality Building Rules and such other applicable Statutes, Rules and Regulations. While doing

¶158

so, the Secretary will also hear Smt.Shailabeevi and Sri.Sivanandhan and consider all relevant and germane inputs that are placed before him by the said parties.

¶159

Sd/-

¶160

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

JUDGE

WPC 3769&11381/18

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3769/2018

¶166

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶167

EXHIBIT P1	A TRUE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE PETITIONER'S BUILDING
EXHIBIT P2	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 28/7/2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P3	A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 28/7/2017 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER OF THE CORPORATION TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P4	A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 28/7/2017 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 408(1) OF THE KERALA MUNICIPALITY ACT, 1994 READ WITH KERALA MUNICIPALITY BUILDING RULES 20(6) & (7) BY THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER OF THE CORPORATION TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P5	A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 7/10/2017 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL
EXHIBIT P6	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE EXTENSION OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE BUILDING ISSUED TO THE RESPONDENT DATED 14/11/2016.
EXHIBIT P7	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE INSPECTION REPORT ALONG WITH THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE DAMAGES TO THE BUILDING BY THE CHARTERED ENGINEER & VALUER AND ARCHITECT.
EXHIBIT P8	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPLY DATED 31/7/2017. A TRUE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE EXTERIOR OF MY HOUSE.
EXHIBIT P9	A TRUE COPY OF PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING

¶168

WPC 3769&11381/18

¶169

¶170

	THE CREVICES WHICH HAVE CREPT INTO MY HOUSE AS A RESULT OF THE ILLEGAL CONSTRUCTION.
EXHIBIT P10	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE TEST REPORT ISSUED BY THE FOOD SAFETY DEPARTMENT IN RESPECT OF THE WATER OF MY HOUSE DATED 26/05/2018.
EXHIBIT P11	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF ORDER DATED 03/10/17 PASSED BY THE LSGI TRIBUNAL IN APPEAL NO.736/2017.
EXHIBIT P12	AA TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF STATEMENT FILED BY SHYLA BHEEVI BEFORE THE LSGI TRIBUNAL DATED 04/04/2018.
EXHIBIT P13	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF STATEMENT FILED BY KOCHI CORPORATION BEFORE THE LSGI TRIBUNAL DATED 22/09/2018 COPY OF EY P1-006892/17.
EXHIBIT P14	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF LETTER NO.EY P1/006892/2017 DATED 11/01/2018 OF THE KOCHI CORPORATION.
EXHIBIT P15	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF LETTER EY P1- 006892/17 DATED 01/02/2018 OF THE KOCHI CORPORATION.
EXHIBIT P16	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY SHAILA BEEVI BEFORE LSGI TRIBUNAL DATED 10/08/2017.
EXHIBIT P17	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF MY POLICE COMPLAINT DATED 10/04/2018.
EXHIBIT P18	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF STATEMENT FILED BY SIVANANDAN BEFORE LSGI TRIBUNAL.
EXHIBIT P19	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF NOTICE SENT BY ADV. P.B.JALEEL DATED 01/12/2017.
EXHIBIT P20	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF BILL OF PHONE CALL (IDEA).
EXHIBIT P21	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF TELEPHONE BILL (58) CALLS (IDEA).

¶171

WPC 3769&11381/18

¶172

¶173

EXHIBIT P22	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF PETITION DATED 21/07/2017 FILED BY SIVANANDAN BEFORE RDO.
EXHIBIT P23	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF MY PETITION DATED 19/07/2017 TO THE CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER.
EXHIBIT P24	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF MY PETITION BEFORE THE COCHIN CORPORATION DATED 29/01/2018.
EXHIBIT P25	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPLY FROM RDO DATED 26/10/2017 (RECEIVED ON 12/06/2018).
EXHIBIT P26	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF MY COMPLAINT TO VILLAGE OFFICER DATED 10/04/2018 AND 23/04/2018.
EXHIBIT P27	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE IG OF POLICE DATED 25/04/2018.
EXHIBIT P28	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF COMPLAINT BEFORE PALARIVATTOM POLICE STATION AGAINST SIDDIQUE CONTRACTOR DATED 01/07/2018.
EXHIBIT P29	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF STATEMENT FILED BEFORE THE LSGI TRIBUNAL REGARDING THE DAMAGE CAUSED TO MY HOUSE DATED 28/03/2018.
EXHIBIT P30	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF MY REPORT POINTING OUT THE MISTAKE IN THE REPORT OF GOVERNMENT ENGINEER DATED 14/02/2018.
EXHIBIT P31	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF TRANSLATION OF THE AVERMENTS CONTAINED IN MY REPORT BEFORE THE LSGI TRIBUNAL.
EXHIBIT P32	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF LETTER DATED 27/10/2018 ADDRESSED TO SI OF VANITHA POLICE STATION, KACHERIPADY, ERNAKULAM.

¶174

WPC 3769&11381/18

¶175

¶176

EXHIBIT P33	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF MY STATEMENT
	BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT (MALAYALAM) DATED 02/04/2018.
EXHIBIT P34	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PETITION DATED 22/09/2018 BEFORE THE LSGI, TVM.
EXHIBIT P35	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PETITION DATED 22/09/2018 FILED BEFORE THE HONOURABLE TRIBUNAL, TVM.
EXHIBIT P36	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LIST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HONOURABLE TRIBUNAL, TRIVANDRUM.
EXHIBIT P37	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.5910/2017/LDS DATED 26/10/2017 ISSUED BY THE R.D.O., KOCHI TO SECRETARY, KOCHI CORPORATION.
EXHIBIT P38	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE TRIBUNAL FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 31/10/2018.
EXHIBIT P39	TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE (STOP MEMO) DATED 29/11/2018.
EXHIBIT P40	PHOTOGRAPHS (12 PHOTOS) SHOWING TH ILLEGAL CONSTRUCTION EXCAVATION AND REMOVAL OF SAND ETC.
EXHIBIT P41	TRUE COPY OF THE NOTES OF KOCHI CORPORATION DATED 03/11/2017.
EXHIBIT P42	TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGE OF THE NOTE DATED 08/01/2018.
EXHIBIT P43	TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 27/01/2018 BY PETITIONER TO KOCHI CORPORATION.
EXHIBIT P44	TRUE COPY OF THE CD AND PHOTOGRAPHS TO SHOW THE NON-EXISTENCE OF WALL AND ILLEGAL CONSTRUCTION DATE WISE.

¶177

WPC 3769&11381/18

¶178

¶179

EXHIBIT P45	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 25/01/2019 BY WRIT PETITIONER TO SECRETARY KOCHI CORPORATION.
EXHIBIT P46	TRUE COPY OF THE RENTAL AGREEMENT TAKING EFFECT FROM 01/02/2019.
EXHIBIT P47	A TRUE COPY OF THE RENTAL AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE 3RD
	RESPONDENT AND THE SAID K.S. HEERA.
EXHIBIT P48	COMPLAINT DISC (CD) CONTAINING THE STATEMENT OF MR. SIDIQUE THE CONTRACTOR OF 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶180

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶181

EXHIBIT R3 (a)	THE TRUE COPY OF THE SAID JUDGMENT IN WP(C)32929/17
EXHIBIT R3 (b)	TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR TRICHUR GOVT. ENGINEERING COLLEGE.
EXHIBIT R3 (c)	THE TRUE COPY OF THE SAID ORDER OF THE SECRETARY -R
EXHIBIT R3 (d)	THE TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 22.1.2018 MADE BY 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT R3 (e)	THE TRUE COPY RECEIVED BY THIS RESPONDENT DATED 20.10.17.
EXHIBIT R3(F)	THE TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE DATED 16/02/2009 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT R3(G)	TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLETION CERTIFICATE DATED 06/06/2017 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT R3(H)	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 12/12/2017 FILED BY THE WRIT PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT R3(I)	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 11/01/2018 OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT.
OTHER EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT C1	A TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN NOTICE DATED 17/04/2018 SERVED ON THE PARTIES.
EXHIBIT C2	A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 17/04/2018 ISSUED TO THE PWD.

¶182

WPC 3769&11381/18

¶183

¶184

EXHIBIT C3	A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER.	WORK MEMO FROM THE
EXHIBIT C4	WORK MEMO FROM THE	RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT C5	A TRUE COPY OF THE OF THE RESPONDENT'S	SOIL INVESTIGATION REPORT PROPERTY.
EXHIBIT C6	A TRUE COPY OF THE OF THE STRUCTURAL E	REPORT DATED 16/05/2018 NGINEER.
EXHIBIT C7	COPY OF THE NOTICE ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE	DATED 25/06/2018 COUNSEL OF ALL PARTIES.
EXHIBIT C8	A TRUE COPY OF THE	LETTER DATED 27/06/2018.
EXHIBIT C9	A TRUE COPY OF THE	BILL DATED 06/06/2018.

¶185

WPC 3769&11381/18

¶186

¶187

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11381/2018

¶188

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶189

EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT OF THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR COMPLETION CERTIFICATE. EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE R2 TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE STOP MEMO ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY NOTICE SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE INSPECTION REPORT OF THE ENGINEER OF ASSOCIATED STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS. EXHIBIT P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE ENGINEERS OF THE TECHNICAL EXPERIENCE COMMITTEE GOVT. ENGINEERING COLLEGE, THRISSUR. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE SECRETARY DATED 11.01.2018. EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECRETARY DATED 22.01.2018. EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.32929/17 DATED 16.10.2017 OF THIS HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA.

¶190

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT R3(A) A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER DATED 09/05/2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT SHOWING THE ALLOTMENT OF OA NUMBER.

¶191

WPC 3769&11381/18

¶192

¶193

EXHIBIT R3(B)	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03/04/2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT CORPORATION.
EXHIBIT R3(C)	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER DATED 20/09/2019 ALONG WITH ITS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DATED 25/09/2019.
OTHER EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT C7	COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 25/06/2018 ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE COUNSEL OF ALL PARTIES.
EXHIBIT C8	A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27/06/2018.
EXHIBIT C9	A TRUE COPY OF THE BILL DATED 06/06/2018.

Sivanandhan T.P v. the Corporation of Kochi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sivanandhan T.P v. the Corporation of Kochi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Leelamma Thomas Vs State of Kerala

Jose Vs Kumbalam Grama Panchayath

P.L.John @ Suni Vs the Kumbalam Grama Panchayat

Lijuthomas Vs the Secretary

Faziludeen Vs State of Kerala

Rajamma Joseph Vs State of Kerala