Dismissed

Vadakkayil Kunjheeryam v. the District Collector

Kerala HC7 Jul 2023WP(C)/1432/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Writ Court treated the dispute over property encroachment and public pathway access as a civil suit matter, directing parties to approach a civil court and quashing the interim orders passed by the collector.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was closed reserving liberty to the parties to take recourse to a civil suit. The petitioner will be bound by the orders in the suit.

Vadakkayil Kunjheeryam Vs the District Collector — Landlord and Tenant | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

W.P(C) No.1432/2013

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.

¶6

FRIDAY, THE 7^TH DAY OF JULY 2023 / 16TH ASHADHA, 1945

¶7

WP(C) NO. 1432 OF 2013

¶8

PETITIONER/S:

¶9

VADAKKAYIL KUNJHEERYAM AGED 49 YEARS W/O. MOIDEEN, THAYYIL HOUSE, KAKKAD P.O, PIN - 676306, THIRURANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV SRI.JAMSHEED HAFIZ

¶11

RESPONDENT/S:

¶12

1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, MALAPPURAM P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶13

2 THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRPUTION BUREAU, MALAPPURAM, MALAPPURAM P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶14

3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER NANNAMBRA VILLAGE, NANNAMBRA P.O., THIRURANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 4 KODINJI SUNNI FEDERATION CENTRE M.A HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, KODINJI P.O, THIRURANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.C.ANILKUMAR (KALLESSERIL) SRI.C.Y.VINOD KUMAR

¶15

OTHER PRESENT:

¶16

SMT.VINEETHA V[SR.GP]

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

W.P(C) No.1432/2013

¶19

¶20

MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., J

¶21

W.P(C) No.1432 of 2013

¶22

Dated this the 7^th day of July, 2023

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

The petitioner, claiming to be the owner of 12.62 cents of property in R.S.No.296/5 of Nannambra Village in Tirurangadi taluk, Malappuram district, challenges Exts.P3 and P7 orders stating that the neighbouring school authorities are trying to encroach upon the property of the petitioner and attempting to use the same as access by cutting open a way to the petitioner's property, on the strength of the orders impugned.

¶25

A perusal of Ext.P7, an order passed by the District Collector pursuant to the directions of this Court in W.P(C) No.15504/2012, shows that the property of the petitioner is being used as access to the school and school ground for years by the public and that the same is closed, which would result in inconvenience to the public as they will have to travel one kilometre more to reach the school.

¶26

A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the fourth respondent contending that the disputed pathway is used by the public from

¶27

W.P(C) No.1432/2013

¶28

¶29

time immemorial and the writ petitioner is attempting to prevent the user of the way by placing laterite stones and thorns on the way. It is also stated that an enquiry conducted by the District Collector after hearing all the parties substantiated the contentions of the fourth respondent and the Revenue Divisional Officer found the public pathway obstructed by the petitioner.

¶30

Having heard the learned counsel and perusing the records, the dispute on hand is nothing but a civil dispute, liable to be adjudicated in a properly constituted civil suit and not in any other manner. Therefore, reserving liberty to the parties to take recourse to a civil suit, this writ petition is closed. I make it clear that the parties will be bound by the orders to be passed in the suit, which will override the impugned orders.

¶31

Subject to the above, the writ petition is disposed.

Sd/-

MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.,

JUDGE

okb/

W.P(C) No.1432/2013

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-

¶39

P1: TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DT.19.6.2012

¶40

P2: SKETCH SHOWING THELIE OF THE PROPERTY DATED NIL

¶41

P3: TRUE COPY OF THE INJUNCTION ORDER PASSED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER DT. 5.6.2012

¶42

P4: TRUE COPY OF NOTICE OF CLARIFICATION ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DT.14.6.2012

¶43

P5: TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT

¶44

P6: TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶45

P7: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DT. 1.12.2012

Vadakkayil Kunjheeryam v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vadakkayil Kunjheeryam v. the District Collector

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

Joseph, (Died) (Lrs Impleaded) Vs Mary Devaisa

Mary Devasia Vs Joseph, (Died) (Lhrs Impleaded)

Ahamadhummal Beevi Kunju,(Died) Vs Retna Bai

Ulladan Saidalavi Vs Shamil.E.

Aneesh Thomas, Vs M/S Lebus LLP

Oil Palm Employees Centre Vs State of Kerala