Sasi Kumar vs D.N.K. Nair & Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 21440 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
  FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 7TH KARTHIKA, 1943
                      WP(C) NO. 34771 OF 2011
PETITIONER:

            SASI KUMAR
            KUNNANNOOR HOUSE, CHENNITHALA SOUTH
            MURI,THRIPPERUMTHURA VILLAGE, PIN-690101.
            BY ADV SRI.R.KRISHNA RAJ

RESPONDENTS:

    1       D.N.K. NAIR
            NANDA VIHAR, CHENNITHALA SOUTH P.O.,MAVELIKKARA,
            PIN-690101.
    2       THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
            CHENGANNOOR, PIN-689292.
    3       THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
            MANNAR, PIN-689257.
            BY ADVS.
            SRI.A.R.DILEEP
            SRI.GEORGE VARGHESEPERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL
            SRI.JOHN VARGHESE
            SRI.MANU SEBASTIAN
            SMT.NAVA VARGHESE

OTHER PRESENT:

            SMT.RASHMI.K.M., SR.GP


     THIS     WRIT   PETITION    (CIVIL)     HAVING    COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION     ON   29.10.2021,    THE     COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C).No.34771/2011

                                        2




                   P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                    --------------------------------
                   W.P.(C).No.34771 of 2011
             ----------------------------------------------
           Dated this the 29th day of October, 2021


                                JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed with following prayers:

i. Direct respondents 2 and 3 to take appropriate steps to see that the 1 st respondent and authorities of Kannanoor Devi Temple are not causing sound pollution and that they use box type sound amplifiers only and in such a way that the sound from the amplifier will not go beyond the boundaries of the temple premises, as directed by this Hon'ble court in its earlier judgment, by the issue of writ of mandamus or such other writ or order or direction.

ii. Grant such other relief that are prayed for during the pendency of this case including the cost.

2. Today, when this writ petition came up for

consideration, the counsel who appeared for the 1 st

respondent submitted that the matter is settled between the W.P.(C).No.34771/2011

parties. But the counsel for the petitioner submitted that he

has no instruction from the party.

3. Whatever that may be, if there is any surviving

grievance to the petitioner, the petitioner is free to approach

the statutory authorities and the statutory authorities will do

the needful in accordance to law.

With the above observation, this writ petition is disposed

of.

sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JV JUDGE W.P.(C).No.34771/2011

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 34771/2011

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP13971/08 Exhibit P2 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT OF THE PETITIONER Exhibit P3 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT Exhibit P4 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT Exhibit P5 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT Exhibit P6 COPY OF HTE PAPER REPORT MALAYALA MANORAMA Exhibit P7 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT Exhibit P8 COPY OF HTE PAPER REPORT MALAYALA MANORAMA Exhibit P9 COPY OF HTE PAPER REPORT MALAYALA MANORAMA Exhibit P10 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT Exhibit P11 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT Exhibit P12 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT Exhibit P13 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT Exhibit P14 COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH EXHIBIT P15 COPY OF THE CIRCULAR

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT R1(A) COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 03.08.2011 IN RSA 28/2011 EXHIBIT R1(B) COPY OF ORDER DATED 23.12.2011 EXHIBIT R1(C) A ROUGH SKETCH SHOWING THE LIE OF TEMPLE AND THE NEARBY BUILDINGS.