Sunday, 17, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

K.C. Velayudhan vs Indulekha
2025 Latest Caselaw 12422 Ker

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 12422 Ker
Judgement Date : 17 December, 2025

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

K.C. Velayudhan vs Indulekha on 17 December, 2025

Author: A. Muhamed Mustaque
Bench: A.Muhamed Mustaque
                                                      2025:KER:97253
W.A. No.2785 of 2025
                                   1

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                              PRESENT

        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

                                   &

        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISANKAR V. MENON

        WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 / 26TH

                         AGRAHAYANA, 1947

                        WA NO. 2785 OF 2025

        AGAINST   THE   JUDGMENT       DATED   22.10.2025   IN   WP(C)

NO.6790 OF 2022 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

APPELLANT/8TH RESPONDENT:

           K.C. VELAYUDHAN, AGED 66 YEARS, KEERTHI,
           T.C.27/2761(1) VIGNESWARA NAGAR, THYCAUD P.O.,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 014


           BY ADVS.
           SMT.SMITHA S.PILLAI
           SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON (SR.)




RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 1 TO 7:

    1      INDULEKHA, AGED 67 YEARS, D/O. SULOCHANAN NAIR,
           RESIDING AT TC 14/1740 (OLD) TC 27/2821 (NEW)
           GANAPTHI KOVIL ROAD, VAZHUTHACAUD,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 014

    2      THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF
           GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001

    3      THE CHIEF TOWN PLANNER (VIGILANCE), VIGILANCE
                                                        2025:KER:97253
W.A. No.2785 of 2025
                                    2

           WING, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SWARAJ
           BHVAN, NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN -
           695 003

    4      THE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CORPORATION, VIKAS BHAVAN
           P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS
           SECRETARY., PIN - 695 033

    5      THE SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CORPORATION,
           CORPORATION BUILDING, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O.
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 033

    6      THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
           CORPORATION, CORPORATION BUILDING, VIKAS BHAVAN
           P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 033

    7      THE TAHSILDAR, (LAND RECORDS) TALUK OFFICE, EAST
           FORT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 023

    8      THE VILLAGE OFFICER, THYCAUD VILLAGE,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 014


           BY ADV SHRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY, SC,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CORPORATION


           SMT K R DEEPA, SPL GP


        THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
17.12.2025,    THE     COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
                                                         2025:KER:97253
W.A. No.2785 of 2025
                                     3




                       JUDGMENT

A. Muhamed Mustaque, J.

This is a case where a private dispute was sought to be

resolved through a public law remedy. The brief facts of the

case are as follows: One Chellappan Pillai executed a

settlement deed, dividing the property belonging to him in

favour of his two children, namely Sulochanan Nair and

Lalithambika Kumari, and set apart a common road. The legal

heirs, who subsequently derived title under the settlement deed

through their predecessor with whom Chellappan Pillai had

executed the deed, sold their respective shares. K. C.

Velayudhan, a total stranger to the family, purchased 4.91

cents of land.

2. The dispute now pertains to the use of the

common road so set apart. K. C. Velayudhan contends that he

is entitled to use the entire road earmarked for common use.

Indulekha, the grandchild of Chellappan Pillai, on the other

hand, contends that the right of K. C. Velayudhan is limited to

access up to his plot and that the road cannot be used beyond 2025:KER:97253

that point.

3. An attempt was made to enter the road in the

asset register of the local authority. In the re-survey records,

the portion of the road lying beyond K. C. Velayudhan's

property was sought to be shown in the name of Indulekha,

which was challenged before the District Collector. The District

Collector interfered in the matter. K. C. Velayudhan also

attempted to have his property included in the asset register of

the local authority and, for that purpose, approached the

Government. As the records show, and as admitted by both

parties, the land in question was originally private land

belonging to one Chellappan Pillai. It has not, so far, been

included in the asset register of the local authority, nor has it

otherwise been treated as a public road. However, K. C.

Velayudhan contends that the road was dedicated to the public

by Chellappan Pillai for the common use of all. There is no

dispute regarding the existence of the road at present. We find

that interference by the public authorities in this matter is

unnecessary.

4. The learned Single Judge has set aside the 2025:KER:97253

order of the District Collector interfering with the re-survey

proceedings on the ground that Indulekha was not afforded an

opportunity of being heard, and has directed reconsideration of

the matter afresh after hearing Indulekha. We are of the view

that such an exercise is unnecessary, as the issue pertains to

private land and disputes among private landowners. It would

be appropriate for the parties to agitate their dispute before the

civil court and have it resolved there. As of now, no public law

element is involved.

5. Be that as it may, we order that no

obstruction shall be caused to the said road, nor shall its

character be altered in any manner, subject to further orders to

be passed by the civil court. Both parties are at liberty to

approach the civil court for the assertion of their respective

rights, and it is for the civil court to decide the manner in which

the road may be used by the parties.

6. We affirm the order of the learned Single

Judge setting aside all the proceedings; however, the order

directing reconsideration is set aside.

7. Neither party shall cause any obstruction on 2025:KER:97253

the road for the time being, and this shall be subject to the

orders to be passed by the civil court. We make it clear that it

is for the civil court to pass appropriate orders on any

application for injunction, based on the rights claimed and the

documents relied upon by the parties. We direct the Tahsildar

(LR), Thiruvananthapuram, to ensure the status quo ante as on

26.07.2019, the date on which the public law remedy was

invoked by the appellant. Obstruction, if any, made in the

road will have to be removed subject to the order of the civil

court.

This writ appeal is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE

Sd/-

HARISANKAR V. MENON JUDGE PR 2025:KER:97253

APPENDIX OF WA NO. 2785 OF 2025

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

ExhibitP1 TYPED COPY OF EXHIBIT P1 (SECOND PAGE) (DEED NO.1927/1978) Exhibit P3 TYPED COPY OF EXT.P3 (SECOND PAGE) (DEED NO. 1284/1995) Exhibit P7 TYPED COPY OF EXT.P7 (SECOND PAGE) Exhibit P10 TYPED COPY OF EXT.P10 (SECOND PAGE) Exhibit 13 TYPED COPY OF EXT.P13 (SECOND PAGE) Exhibit P19 (8)8 TYPED COPY OF EXT.P19 (8) Exhibit R8(6) TYPED COPY OF R8(6) Exhibit R8(9) TYPED COPY OF R8(9)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter