V. Krishnakumar vs Kollan Municipal Corporation
2021 Latest Caselaw 15742 Ker

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
   FRIDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 8TH SRAVANA, 1943
                     WP(C) NO. 885 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

         V. KRISHNAKUMAR,
         AGED 45 YEARS,
         S/O. VENKATACHALAM,
         SREE BHAGYALEKSHMI,
         KANNIMEL CHERRY, ARSHA NAGAR,
         KAVANADU P.O., KOLLAM - 691 003.

         BY ADV SRI.C.R.JAYAKUMAR


RESPONDENTS:

    1    KOLLAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
         REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
         CHINNAKKADA P.O., KOLLAM 691 001.
    2    THE SECRETARY,
         KOLLAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
         CHINNAKKADA P.O., KOLLAM 691 001.
    3    SASIDHARA KURUP,
         AGED 56 YEARS,
         S/O. GOPALAKRISHNA PILLAI,
         KANNIMEL CHERRY, ARSHA NAGAR,
         KAVANADU P.O., KOLLAM 691 003.

         BY ADVS.
         SRI.M.K.CHANDRA MOHAN DAS,SC, KOLLAM MPT
         SRI.B.MOHANLAL

     THIS WRIT PETITION       (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP       FOR
ADMISSION ON 30.07.2021,      THE COURT ON THE SAME        DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.885/2021
                                 :2 :




                        JUDGMENT

~~~~~~~~~

Dated this the 30th day of July, 2021

The writ petition has been filed by the petitioner

aggrieved by the alleged illegal and unauthorised construction

made by the 3rd respondent who is a building contractor.

According to the petitioner, the 3rd respondent had carried out

the construction of a shed and bathroom of permanent nature,

using cement bricks, in the property owned by him. This was

done without permission or sanction of the 1 st respondent-

Municipal Corporation. The construction encroaches upon the

Corporation road. Though the residents in the locality made

complaints, no action has been taken.

2. The petitioner further alleges that the waste water

from the bathroom of the 3 rd respondent is drained to the

public road causing unhygienic situation and nuisance. In

such circumstances, the petitioner has filed complaint before WP(C) No.885/2021

the competent authorities. The petitioner seeks to command

respondents 1 and 2 to immediately demolish and remove the

illegal construction on the property of the 3 rd respondent.

3. The 3rd respondent entered appearance and denied

all the material allegations made by the petitioner in the writ

petition. According to the 3rd respondent, he has not

committed any illegality and the petitioner in the writ petition

has no cause of action against the 3rd respondent. The

petitioner is a person residing at a distant place and the

petitioner has been put up by person inimical to the 3 rd

respondent. In such circumstances, the writ petition is

motivated and it is only to be dismissed, contended the

learned counsel for the 3rd respondent.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner,

the learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 and 2 and the

learned counsel for the 3rd respondent.

5. From the statement filed on behalf of respondents 1

and 2, it is noted that on the basis of the complaints submitted

by the petitioner, the Corporation authorities conducted a site WP(C) No.885/2021

inspection and noted a temporary shed set up in the area in

question. As the shed did not comply with the set back norms

prescribed by the Building Rules, a notice has been issued to

the 3rd respondent and the 3rd respondent was directed to

demolish the same.

6. As respondents 1 and 2 have already acted on the

basis of the complaints made by the petitioner, it is for

respondents 1 and 2 to bring those proceedings to its logical

end. In the circumstances, respondents 1 and 2 are directed

to conclude the proceedings issued as per notice dated

30.11.2020 issued to the 3 rd respondent in accordance with

law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and

the 3rd respondent.

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH, JUDGE

aks/03.08.2021 WP(C) No.885/2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 885/2021

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT OF THE PETITIONER DATED 09.10.2020 TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT OF THE PETITIONER DATED 30.10.2020 TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 06.01.2021 TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS No.17/2018 PENDING BEFORE THE HON'BLE MUNSIFF COURT AT KOLLAM

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT R3(A) THE TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX REMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 9/7/2021 BEFORE THE VILLAGE OFFICER, SHAKTHIKULANGARA EXHIBIT R3(B) THE TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING TAX REMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 9/7/2021 BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT R3(C) THE TRUE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PATHWAY AND THE BUILDING OF SRI.RAJESH SITUATED ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT EXHIBIT R3(D) THE TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT KOLLAM, IN O.S.

No.17/2018 DATED 13.06.2019 EXHIBIT R3(E) THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY NOTICE SENT BY THE COUNSEL FOR THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO ADV.SRI.BAIJU KUMAR ON JUNE 2020 SR