Quashed

Sunabha v. the Presiding Officer(Sub Collector)

Kerala HC23 Sept 2021WP(C)/12730/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged an order by the Maintenance Tribunal under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act regarding a water flow dispute. The Court held that the dispute involved only nearby property owners and did not involve dependants or relatives of the complainant, falling outside the Act's scope. The order was quashed, directing the Revenue Divisional Officer to

What did the court decide?

The impugned order under the Maintenance Act is quashed. The complaint is to be considered under Section 133 CrPC with notices issued to affected parties.

Sunabha Vs the Presiding Officer(Sub Collector) — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 23^RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 1ST ASWINA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 12730 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1 SUNABHA AGED 62 YEARS W/O. LATE RAMADASAN P.V, SURABHI, PADAVATHALA VALAPPIL, ERANHIPALAM P.O, EAST NADAKKAVU, KOZHIKODE 673 006 2 SHIBINDAS AGED 35 YEARS S/O. LATE RAMADASAN P.V, SURABHI, PADAVATHALA VALAPPIL, ERANHIPALAM P.O, EAST NADAKKAVU, KOZHIKODE BY ADVS. SRINATH GIRISH P.JERIL BABU

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 THE PRESIDING OFFICER(SUB COLLECTOR) MAINTENANCE TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE 673 020 2 PRABHAKARAN, AGED 70 YEARS S/O. KUMARAN, KANJOLLIPARAMBA, EAST NADAKKAVU, ERANHIPALAM P.O, KOZHIKODE 673 006 BY ADVS. SMRUTHI SASIDHARAN SREEJA SASIDHARAN SHANI.P BY SMT.SHEEJA C.S., SR. GOVT. PLEADER

¶10

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶11

SATHISH NINAN, J.

¶12

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W. P. (C) No.12730 of 2021

¶13

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 23^rd day of September, 2021

¶14

J U D G M E N T

¶15

Ext.P8 order passed by the first respondent under

¶16

the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior

¶17

Citizens Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) is

¶18

under challenge in this writ petition.

¶19

The second respondent herein filed Ext.P1

¶20

complaint before the Revenue Divisional Officer alleging obstruction to the flow of water through a drain resulting in water clogging in his property. The Revenue Divisional Officer, exercised powers of the Maintenance Tribunal under the Act and issued Ext.P2 notice in terms

¶21

of Rules under the Act. The proceedings resulted in

¶22

Ext.P8 order.

¶23

The grievance of the second respondent in Ext.P1

¶24

does not relate to a claim for maintenance or any relief

¶25

W. P. (C) No.12730 of 2021 -: 2 :-

¶26

falling within the purview of the Act. The petitioners are neither dependants nor relatives of the second respondent. They are only nearby property owners. The grievance of the second respondent does not fall within the purview of the Act. Therefore, the Revenue Divisional Officer was not right in considering Ext.P1 complaint as one filed under the Act and passing orders thereon. The order is liable to be set aside.

¶27

A reading of Ext.P1 indicates that the complaint

¶28

is filed seeking exercise of the powers under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Revenue Divisional Officer is to initiate proceedings in terms thereof upon Ext.P1 complaint.

¶29

Accordingly the writ petition is allowed. Ext.P8 order of the first respondent is quashed. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kozhikode, shall take up Ext.P1

¶30

W. P. (C) No.12730 of 2021 -: 3 :-

¶31

complaint for consideration, issue notice to the affected parties including the petitioners and the 2^nd respondent, and take appropriate action on the complaint, expeditiously.

¶32

Sd/- SATHISH NINAN JUDGE

kns/-

//True Copy//

P.S. to Judge

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12730/2021

¶37

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶38

Exhibit P1	TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P2	TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE RECEIVED FROM THE MAINTENANCE TRIBUNAL DATED 02-06-2021
Exhibit P4	TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED BY THE KOZHIKODE CORPORATION IN THE NAME OF 1ST PETITIONER.
Exhibit P3	TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE MAINTENANCE TRIBUNAL
Exhibit P4	TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED BY THE KOZHIKODE CORPORATION IN THE NAME OF 1ST PETITIONER.
Exhibit P5	COMPUTERISED SITE PLAN OF THE LOCALITY
Exhibit P6	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF HONOURABLE LSGI TRIBUNAL IN I.A NO. 365/2021 IN APPEAL NO. 154/2021
Exhibit P6	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF HONOURABLE LSGI TRIBUNAL IN I.A NO. 365/2021 IN APPEAL NO. 154/2021
Exhibit P7	TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD AND SKETCH PREPARED BY THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, KOZHIKODE CORPORATION
Exhibit P8	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE MAINTENANCE TRIVUNAL, KOZHIKODE, IN FILE NO. RDOKKD/2819/2021-N1 DATED 18-06-2021

Sunabha v. the Presiding Officer(Sub Collector)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunabha v. the Presiding Officer(Sub Collector)

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

Saraswathi Vs the Joint Registrar (General)

Saraswathi Vs the Joint Registrar (General)

Saraswathi Vs the Joint Registrar (General)

Biju Varghese Vs Jijo Jose

K.Sabarinathan Vs District Collector

Akhila.P Vs Regional Officer