Sudev Sathian vs Corporation Of Thrissur
2022 Latest Caselaw 8328 Ker

            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

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

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.