IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JULY 2022 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 26224 OF 2020
PETITIONER:
SUDEV SATHIAN
AGED 45 YEARS
S/O. SATHIAN IYYANI, IYYANI HOUSE,
VADAKKUMMURI P. O., THRISSUR - 680 570.
BY ADVS.
A.BALAGOPALAN
SRI.SOJO J.KALLIDUKIL
SRI.M.S.IMTHIYAZ AHAMMED
SMT.P.SEENA
SHRI.SREEDASS K P
SHRI.VISWANATH SALISH
RESPONDENTS:
1 CORPORATION OF THRISSUR
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, M. O. ROAD,
THRISSUR - 680 001.
2 M/S MANUALSONS HOUSING DEVELOPING COMPANY (P) LTD.
M. O. ROAD, THRISSUR - 680 001,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
BY ADV SHRI. SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL, SC, THRISSUR
CORPORATION
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 01.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C).No.26224/2020
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
--------------------------------
W.P.(C).No.26224 of 2020
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 01st day of July, 2022
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed with following prayers:
i. Issue a writ of Mandamus or other writ or order or direction directing the 2 nd respondent to grant building permit to the petitioner notwithstanding the failure or non compliance of condition, if any, by the 2 nd respondent company or a Third party.
ii. Issue a writ of certiorari or other writ or order or direction quashing Ext.P4 and all further steps, if any taken by the 1st respondent corporation pursuant to the same. iii. Issue such other writ, order or direction as this Honourable court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of this case.
(SIC)
2. The main prayer in this writ petition is against Ext.P4 communication by which the 1 st respondent took a stand that the terms of development agreement were not W.P.(C).No.26224/2020 3 fulfilled by the 2nd respondent and the above land is classified as Nilam in the possession certificate. Hence this writ petition.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the 1 st respondent Corporation.
4. Both sides concede that the point raised in this writ petition is covered in favour of the petitioner in the light of Ext.P3 judgment. In the light of the above submission, this writ petition can be allowed.
Therefore, this writ petition is allowed in the following manner:
1. Ext.P4 is quashed.
2. The 2nd respondent is directed to grant building permit to the petitioner notwithstanding the failure or non compliance of conditions, if any, mentioned by the 2 nd respondent company or a third party, if the application is otherwise in order.
sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JV JUDGE W.P.(C).No.26224/2020 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26224/2020 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAN WITH LAYOUT. EXHIBIT P1 (a) TRUE COPY OF CONDITIONS ISSUED BY THRISSUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY.
EXHIBIT P2 A LIST OF BUILDING NUMBERS ALREADY OCCUPIED BY THE ALLOTTEES.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN WP(C) NO.7231/2013 DATED 26.03.2014. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM THE CORPORATION DATED 19.08.2016.
EXHIBIT P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF LAND BANK RECORDS.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT DATED 19.01.2013 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.