Kerala High Court
T.C.Joy vs T.C.Joy on 17 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 28TH MAGHA,1942
RP.No.1004 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 18541/2017
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 18541/2017 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONER/RESPONDENT NO.2:
T.C.JOY, AGED 45 YEARS
THEYYATHETTU HOUSE, NEENDOOR P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-
686 601.
BY ADV. SRI.P.I.GEORGEKUTTY
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS AND OTHER RESPONDENTS 1 AND 3 TO 5:
1 THOMAS GEORGE, S/O.OUSEPH KORA, THEYYATHETTU HOUSE,
NEENDOOR KARA, NEENDOOR P.O., ONAMTHURUTHU VILLAGE,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 601.
2 OUSEPH KORA, THEYYATHETTU HOUSE, NEENDOOR KARA,
NEENDOOR P.O., ONAMTHURUTHU VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM
DISTRICT-686 601.
3 ANNAMMA GEORGE,
W/O.OUSEPH KORA, THEYYATHETTU HOUSE, NEENDOOR KARA,
NEENDOOR P.O., ONAMTHURUTHU VILLAGE,
4 THE SECRETARY, NEENDOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
NEENDOOR, KOTTAYAM-686 601.
5 P.T.JOY, CORRECTED AS P.T.JOHN, PATHARAPPALLIL VEEDU,
NEENDOOR P.O., ONAMTHURUTHU VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM-686
601.
6 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 001.
7 TAHSILDAR (LR),
TALUK OFFICE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 601.
ADV. SRI.S GOPINATHAN SR GP
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
17.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
RP.No.1004 OF 2020& R.P.NO.989 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 18541/2017
2
ORDER
Dated this the 17th day of February 2021
These two review petitions have come up
aggrieved by the direction of this Court in the
judgment to initiate action in removing the
encroachment as noted in Ext.P3.
2. R.P.No.989 of 2020 was filed by the 3 rd
respondent in the writ petition. The review
petitioners are respondents 2 and 3 respectively in
the writ petition. According to them, there is a
civil suit pending and therefore, the finding that
there is an encroachment has to be reviewed as they
apprehend that such observation in the judgment
would stand in the way of claiming right, interest
over the land which is the subject matter of the
civil suit.
3. This Court, in fact, had not adjudicated
on the issue regarding the encroachment. This Court
only relied on the survey report for giving
direction to the official respondents to initiate
action under the Kerala Land Conservancy Act, 1957.
RP.No.1004 OF 2020& R.P.NO.989 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 18541/2017
If the review petitioners are having any right to be
protected, they can very well seek such remedy
before the civil court. Any observation in the
judgment will not stand in the way of establishing
independent right over such land by the review
petitioners. Needless to say, if any order is
passed by the civil court, the official respondents
are bound to honour such orders. However, nothing
prevents the public officials in proceeding with the
Kerala Land Conservancy Act to remove the
encroachment following procedure under the Kerala
Land Conservancy Act subject to any order of the
civil court. It is made clear that while initiating
proceedings under the Kerala Land Conservancy Act,
the official respondents shall scrupulously follow
the procedure as contemplated under the Kerala Land
Conservancy Act.
These review petitions are disposed of as above.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
SAS/17/02/2021
JUDGE
RP.No.1004 OF 2020& R.P.NO.989 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 18541/2017
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A THE TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION PASSED IN
PANCHAYATH COMMITTEE DATED 19.08.2014.
ANNEXURE B THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OS NO.104
OF 2017 OF MUNSIFF COURT, ETTUMANOOR DATED
24.01.2019.
ANNEXURE C THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE
REVIEW PETITIONER AS NO.AS NO.54 OF 2019 OF
DISTRICT COURT, KOTTAYAM DATED 11.03.2019.
ANNEXURE D THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT FROM RESPONDENT
PANCHAYATH DATED 13.02.2017.
ANNEXURE E THE TRUE COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF TALUK
SURVEYOR IN OS NO.104 OF 2017 DATED
08.11.2018.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:- NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
