Disposed

Jinesh, v. the Tahasildar

Kerala HC11 Mar 2019WP(C)/3918/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble The Chief Justice allowed the writ petition seeking direction not to evict or demolish the petitioner's building. It was held that eviction/demolition requires prior compliance with Kerala Land Conservancy Act, 1957, including notice, opportunity of objection, and final order.

What did the court decide?

No action shall be taken to evict or demolish the building without recourse to procedure under the Kerala Land Conservancy Act, 1957, including issuance of notice and giving opportunity to raise objec

Jinesh, Vs the Tahasildar — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

MONDAY ,THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 20TH PHALGUNA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 3918 of 2019

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

JINESH, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O GEORGE, MANJALI HOUSE, AMBALLUR P.O., THRISSUR-680 301.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.S.GANESH SRI.PAUL JACOB SRI.PEARL K.DAVIS SRI.P.SREEKUMAR

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE TAHASILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, MUKUNDAPURAM, THRISSUR-680 733.

¶11

2 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VILLAGE OFFICE, AMBALLUR, THRISSUR-680 301.

¶12

SR. GP SRI. S. GOPINATHAN

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

WP(C).No. 3918 of 2019

¶15

-2-

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

The petitioner approached this Court seeking prayers against respondents not evict him from the land claimed him to be in possession of him in Survey No.116 in Amballur Village, Thrissur. He seeks also a further prayer not to demolish the building exist there. He claims possession by virtue of Ext.P4. I am of the view that the first respondent is free to initiate action in accordance with the Kerala Land Conservancy Act, 1957 after issuing notice to him. However, no action shall be taken to evict or demolish the building without recourse to procedure under the Kerala Land Conservancy Act. The petitioner shall also be given an opportunity to raise his objection. The first respondent shall also advert to the possession certificate, if any, issued. It is made clear that, without passing any final order under the Kerala Land Conservancy Act, no proceedings to evict the petitioner shall be initiated.

¶18

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶19

Sd/-

¶20

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶21

JUDGE

¶22

akv

¶23

WP(C).No. 3918 of 2019

¶24

-3-

¶25

APPENDIX

¶26

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶27

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER DATED 19.12.2005 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOC DATED 24.1.2006 OF ALAGAPPANAGAR GRAMA PANCHAYATH EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF ELECTRICITY BILL EXHIBIT P6 PHOTOS TAKEN DURING THE COURSE OF ACTION OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT, VILLAGE OFFICER

¶28

//TRUE COPY//

¶29

CA TO JUDGE

Jinesh, v. the Tahasildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jinesh, v. the Tahasildar

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

Jaison Pius, Vs Jojy.P.Jose

Bethel Plantations Pvt. Ltd. Vs Provident Fund Commissioner

M/S. First Steps Baby Wear Pvt.Ltd. Vs Assistant State Tax Officer

P.Ramachandran, Vs Union of India (Uoi)

M/S.Elavally Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Vs the State Tax Officer

Varghese Tv Vs Divisional Forest Officer