Single judge acquired jurisdiction to dispose of the writ petition by directing the Fourth Respondent to decide on a complaint representation regarding disputed property possession within one month.
Directed the Fourth Respondent to decide on Ext.P3 representation with notice to the Petitioner and Fifth Respondent within one month.
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 MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 27TH KARTHIKA, 1942
WP(C).No.25281 OF 2020(I)
PETITIONER:
JAYARAMAN
AGED 71 YEARS S/O SANKUNNI,EKKODE HOUSE, CHITHALI,KUZHALMANNAM.P.O,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT,PRESENTLY RESIDING AT FEDERAL FORT,MANAPPULLIKKAVU.P.O, PALAKKAD-678013.
BY ADV. SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN
RESPONDENTS:
5 HAMEED, S/O SYED MUHAMMED RAWTHER, NIRAVAKKOTTLE,CHITHALI, KUZHALMANNAM.P.O, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-678702.
BY ADV.SRI.K.J.MANURAJ, GP
WP(C).No.25281 OF 2020(I)
2
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.25281 OF 2020(I)
3
W.P.(C) No.25281 of 2020
J U D G M E N T
The limited prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner when this matter was taken for admission, was for a direction to the fourth respondent to take a decision on Ext.P3 representation. Ext.P3 is a representation in which the petitioner has complained to the Village Officer that a property which is the subject matter of litigation between the petitioner and the fifth respondent is being illegally reclaimed by the fifth respondent.
Having regard to the nature of the allegations in Ext.P3, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the fourth respondent to take up Ext.P3 representation and take appropriate action on the same with notice to the petitioner as also the fifth respondent. Ordered accordingly. This shall be done within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition
WP(C).No.25281 OF 2020(I)
4
for compliance before the fourth respondent.
Sd/-
P.B.SURESH KUMAR
JUDGE
Mn
WP(C).No.25281 OF 2020(I)
5
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
| EXHIBIT P1 | TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED 23.12.2015 IN R.F.A.NOS.668/2013,26/2014 AND F.A.O.321/2013. |
|---|---|
| EXHIBIT P2 | TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED 31- 10-2016 IN O.S.NO.374/2003,456/2008,558/2009 AND 552/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL SUBORDINATE JUDGES COURT,PALAKKAD |
| EXHIBIT P3 | TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT PREFERRED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT VILLAGE OFFICER DATED 20.10.2020. |
| EXHIBIT P4 | TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 20.10.2020 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE TAHSILDAR, ALATHUR TALUK. |
| EXHIBIT P5 | TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 20.10.2020 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER. |
| EXHIBIT P5(A) | TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT ACKNOWLEDGING EXHIBIT P-5 DATED 23.10.2020. |
| EXHIBIT P-6 | TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DISTRICT COLLECTOR,20.10.20. |
//TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition ought to be directed to the Fourth Respondent to take a decision on the representation alleging illegal reclamation of property.
Jayaraman
The District Collector
The Revenue Divisional Officer
The Tahsildar
The Village Officer
Hameed
P.B. Suresh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
