Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

ANIL KUMAR.P.K., S/O.KUTTAPPAN versus CHANDRAN, AGED 42 YEARS

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


ANIL KUMAR.P.K., S/O.KUTTAPPAN v. CHANDRAN, AGED 42 YEARS - WP(C) No. 32835 of 2006(H) [2007] RD-KL 4465 (1 March 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 32835 of 2006(H)

1. ANIL KUMAR.P.K., S/O.KUTTAPPAN,
... Petitioner

2. BIJU.K.G., S/O.GOPI,

Vs

1. CHANDRAN, AGED 42 YEARS,
... Respondent

2. CHANDRIKA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,

3. RDO, CHENGANNUR, ALAPPUZHA.

4. TAHSILDAR, KARTHIKAPALLY,

5. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,

6. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,

7. THE SECRETARY,

8. S.I. OF POLICE, KARIYILAKULANGARA,

For Petitioner :SRI.BIJU M.JOHN

For Respondent :SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL)

The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE

Dated :01/03/2007

O R D E R

PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, J.

W.P.(C)NO. 32835 of 2006 Dated this 1st day of February, 2007

JUDGMENT

The grievance, which has been voiced by the petitioners, is that the respondents 1 and 2 are constructing structures encroaching into the puramboke land. The Government Pleader, on the basis of the instructions received from the 3rd respondent Revenue Divisional Officer, submits that constructions have been made by respondents 1 and 2 encroaching into the area which is shown as public well as per the Basic Tax Register.

2. Even though counsel for respondents 1 and 2 sought time for filing counter affidavit, I am of the view that this court need not decide the issue on its merits at this stage. While admitting this writ petition, this court had made it clear that the constructions, which are taken up by respondents 1 and 2, will be subject to final outcome of the writ petition. It appears that during the pendency of the writ petition, the construction has WPC No.32835/2006 2 been completed. Now the 3rd respondent is of the opinion that the constructions have been made on a puramboke. Accordingly, this writ petition will stand disposed of directing respondents 3 to 7 to take appropriate action for abating the encroachment i.e. by evicting respondents 1 and 2 not only from the land encroached upon but also by removing the constructions put up by them. The action as directed above will be taken only in accordance with law i.e. after issuing notice to respondents 1 and 2 and after hearing them. Necessary action as directed above will be completed by the concerned respondents at their earliest and at any rate within three months of receiving a copy of this judgment. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE Judge dpk


Copyright

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

Advertisement

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.