The South Indian Bank Ltd vs Thrissur Corporation
2021 Latest Caselaw 19267 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
           THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
   TUESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 23RD BHADRA, 1943
                     WP(C) NO.14778 OF 2021
PETITIONER :-

          THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD.
          SIB HOUSE, T.D. ROAD, P.B. NO. 28,
          THRISSUR - 680 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER,
          MR.MATHEW C PAUL.

          BY ADVS.
          SUNIL SHANKER
          VIDYA GANGADHARAN


RESPONDENTS :-

    1     THRISSUR CORPORATION
          CORPORATION OFFICE, THRISSUR - 680 656,
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

    2     SECRETARY,
          THRISSUR CORPORATION, CORPORATION OFFICE,
          THRISSUR, PIN - 680 656.

    3     EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
          THRISSUR CORPORATION, CORPORATION OFFICE,
          THRISSUR, PIN - 680 656.

          BY SRI.SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL, SC, THRISSUR CORPORATION

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
14.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO.14778 OF 2021

                                         -: 2 :-


                                  JUDGMENT

Dated this the 14th day of September, 2021

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs :-

"a. Call for the records leading to Ext.P6 and Ext.P2 and set aside the aforesaid Ext.P6 and Ext.P2 by a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, direction or order.

b. Direct the respondent to issue permit in pursuance to Ext.P5 application for alteration (roof change) submitted by the petitioner, by the issuance of a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, direction or order.

c. In the alternative, direct the Respondents to reconsider Ext.P5 application for alteration (roof change) submitted by the petitioner as requested in Ext.P7, and pass orders thereon without reference to Ext.P2 notice, expeditiously, at any rate within a time limit to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court, by the issuance of a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, direction or order."

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

Standing Counsel appearing for the Corporation.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner

that the application preferred by the petitioner for roof change and

alteration of building in the property belonging to the petitioner had

been rejected by Ext.P6 on the ground that Ext.P2 notice had been

issued in 2019 stating that the building is in a dilapidated condition.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had WP(C) NO.14778 OF 2021

submitted Ext.P7 before the respondents pointing out that the report

of a Structural Engineer had been obtained by the petitioner bank

and that survey sketch can also be produced by the petitioner to

allay the apprehensions expressed in Ext.P6. It is submitted that the

application preferred by the petitioner is liable to be reconsidered,

taking note of Ext. P7, in accordance with law.

4. The learned Standing Counsel submits that it was on the

basis of a report submitted that Ext.P6 had been issued. It is,

therefore, contended that the reasons stated in Ext.P6 have to be

considered before the application can be acted upon.

5. Having considered the contentions advanced, I am of the

opinion that in view of the specific facts stated in Ext.P7, the request

made by the petitioner for alteration and for change of roof of the

building requires a reconsideration, taking note of Ext.P7 as well.

There will, accordingly, be a direction to the respondents

to take up the application preferred by the petitioner for alteration

and change of roof and to consider the same, taking note of Ext.P7

and after considering all relevant records including the survey sketch

as well as the report of the Structural Engineer referred to in Ext.P7.

The respondents will be free to carry out any inspections in the WP(C) NO.14778 OF 2021

property to ascertain the stability of the building, before orders are

passed. Orders shall be passed within a period of two months from

the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE

Jvt/18.9.2021 WP(C) NO.14778 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14778/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE BUILDING.

Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE REF. NO. DW7-30373/10 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE STRUCTURAL STABILITY CERTIFICATE.

Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER.

Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF 3RD RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF PETITIONER.