T.DEVARAJAN,S/O.T.CHANDUKUTTY versus KOZHIKODE CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY

High Court of Kerala

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

---

T.DEVARAJAN,S/O.T.CHANDUKUTTY v. KOZHIKODE CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY - WP(C) No. 12552 of 2007(T) [2007] RD-KL 16143 (20 August 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 12552 of 2007(T)

1. T.DEVARAJAN,S/O.T.CHANDUKUTTY,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. KOZHIKODE CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.SURESH KUMAR KODOTH

For Respondent :SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN,SC,KOZHIKODE CORP

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH

Dated :20/08/2007

O R D E R

K.M.JOSEPH, J.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C).No. 12552 OF 2007
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Dated this the 20th day of August, 2007

JUDGMENT

Condition No.3 in Ext.P4 permit granted to the petitioner reads as follows:

" The construction should be demolished by the party at his own risk and cost at the time of road widening started." This is challenged by the petitioner. According to the petitioner when this court in Ext.P3 judgment ordered that the construction of the building on the strength of the permit issued will be at the risk of the petitioner did not bear the meaning which is sought to be given in Ext.P4. After the filing of the writ petition, petitioner moved a review petition as R.P.No.550/2007 before the learned Judge who delivered Ext.P3 judgment. The learned Judge has proceeded to dispose of the Review Petition as follows: " But in the last sentence of my judgment

I had observed that in view of the Corporation's  WPC No.12552/07 2 stand that there was a proposal to acquire the property, the construction of the building on the strength of the building permit to be issued to the petitioner, will be at the risk of the petitioner. What I intended was only that if the petitioner constructs a building on the basis of the permit to be issued to him pursuant to my judgment, the petitioner stands the risk of loosing that newly constructed building if acquisition is takes place. I never intended to say that the petitioner will not be entitled for any compensation under the Land Acquisition Act. Subject to the above clarification, the R.P. is disposed of." The writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to pass appropriate orders bearing in mind the judgment in R.P.No.550/07 within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

(K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE)

sv.  WPC No.12552/07 3 

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.