Shiraz Bava vs Corporation Of Kochi
2023 Latest Caselaw 5922 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
     WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF MAY 2023 / 3RD JYAISHTA, 1945
                       WP(C) NO. 16131 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

          SHIRAZ BAVA, AGED 43, S/O.LATE A.K.BAVA,
          HAKIM MANZIL, C.P.UMMER ROAD, PULLEPADY,
          ERNAKULAM, PIN: 682 035.

          BY ADVS.K.R.VINOD
          M.S.LETHA
          NABIL KHADER
          CHITHRA C.EDADAN


RESPONDENTS:

    1     CORPORATION OF KOCHI,
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
          CORPORATION OFFICE, ERNAKULAM, PIN- 682 011.

    2     THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF COCHIN,
          CORPORATION OFFICE, ERNAKULAM,
          PIN: 682 011.

    3     ABDUL KAREEM, AGED 59, S/O. P.K.MUHAMMED,
          PARAKKATTU HOUSE, C.P.UMMER ROAD,
          KOCHI, PIN - 682035.

    4     THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE,
          ERNAKULAM, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD,
          KOCHI - 682 030.

          BY ADV SHEHEERA P.Y.
          K.JANARDHANA SHENOY-SC,
          DEVISREE.R-G.P


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
24.05.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 16131 OF 2023

                                  -2-

                               JUDGMENT

Dated this the 24th day of May, 2023

The petitioner is aggrieved by the alleged hasty steps

taken by the 2nd respondent to issue Building Permit in favour

of the 3rd respondent to construct a compound wall.

2. According to the petitioner, there is a pathway

adjoining the land of the 3rd respondent, where he is going to

construct a compound wall. The pathway has width of

2.5 Metres and this is evidenced by Ext.P1 judgment.

However, now the 1st respondent is going to grant permission

to construct a compound wall reducing the width of the

pathway to 1.5 Metres. If this is done, the petitioner will be

put to untold hardship and the judgment of the II nd Additional

District Judge, Ernakulam in A.S. No.54/2018 will be rendered

futile. In the circumstances, respondents 1 and 2 are

compellable not to issue Building Permit to the

3rd respondent.

WP(C) NO. 16131 OF 2023

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

the learned Standing Counsel representing respondents 1

and 2 and the Government Pleader representing the 4 th

respondent. In view of the nature of the relief to be granted in

the writ petition, notice to the 3 rd respondent is dispensed

with.

4. Since the petitioner has a case that the pathway in

question has a width of 2.5 Metres and the 3 rd respondent

intends to construct a compound wall in such a way so as to

reduce the pathway to 1.5 Metres, it would only be

appropriate that respondents 1 and 2 hear the petitioner also

in the matter while taking a final decision on the grant of

Permit for the construction of the compound wall by the 3 rd

respondent.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the

2nd respondent-Secretary to the Corporation of Cochin to

consider the grievance raised by the petitioner in this regard

while considering the application for Building Permit, if any, WP(C) NO. 16131 OF 2023

submitted by the 3rd respondent for construction of the

compound wall in question, adverting to Ext.P1 judgment

also. It is made clear that this Court has not pronounced

anything on merit on the arguments raised by the petitioner in

this writ petition.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH JUDGE spk WP(C) NO. 16131 OF 2023

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16131/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 THE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN A.S.NO.54/2018 AND A.S.NO.64/2018 DATED 21.11.2019

EXHIBIT P2 THE COPY OF THE COMMISSION REPORT AND PLAN . OS 654/2008

EXHIBIT P3 THE COPY OF THE FACE BOOK POST DATED 15.05.2023 OF THE 4 TH RESPONDENT