IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 28291 of 2007(R)
1. OMANA,D/O. C.R.JOSEPH,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. AKATHETHARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT REPRESENTED
... Respondent
2. THE SECRETARY,
For Petitioner :SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN
For Respondent :SRI.R.GIREESH VARMA
The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
Dated :29/11/2007
O R D E R
PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(c).No. 28291 OF 2007
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 29th day of November, 2007
JUDGMENT
The grievance of the petitioner, who has completed the
construction of a building on the strength of a building permit given by
the first respondent Panchayat as Permit No.19/96-99 as per
completion certificate dated 12/05/1998, is that the Panchayat has not
yet assigned door number to the building, though the Secretary of the
Panchayat had made an endorsement on the file, that door number can
be assigned to the building. According to the petitioner, there is no
justifiable reason for the Panchayat to decline numbering of the
building. Petitioner gathers that it is on the reason of the pendency of
some civil disputes between the petitioner and her neighbour one
Sri.Krishnakumar that the Panchayat is being diffident in the matter of
assigning door number. The petitioner points out that when
Sri.Krishna Kumar tried to obstruct the pathway situated on the
northern side of the petitioner’s property, which was a common passage
for both the parties, petitioner preferred O.S.No.122/03 before the
WPC.No.28291/08 2
Munsiff Court, Palakkad. Krishnakumar raised a counter claim in the
said suit that the petitioner’s building had been constructed in violation
of the building Rules. The suit and the counter claim were tried and
after trial, by Ext.P1 judgment, the suit was decreed and the counter
claim was dismissed. Sri.Krishnakumar has preferred an appeal as
A.S.No.125/07 which is pending before the District Court, Palakkad.
When the petitioner applied to the second respondent for assigning for
a door number for the building producing a copy of Ext.P1 judgment,
the second respondent informed the petitioner under Ext.P2 that
number can be assigned only after northern boundary is fixed on the
basis of the measurement by the revenue authorities. To Ext.P2,
petitioner submitted a reply stating that she has no objection in having
a measurement, but at the same time, contended that there is no
requirement for such a measurement. The petitioner claims that the
property was measured pursuant to Ext.P3 and it was found that there is
no encroachment of the petitioner’s building into the property of the the
above said Krishnakumar. The grievance is that even thereafter the
Panchayat is not assigning door number to the building as a result of
WPC.No.28291/08 3
which the petitioner is unable to apply for electricity connection and
other utility connections. Even though the respondents were served
with notice, they have not entered appearance before this court for
resisting the prayers in the writ petition.
Having heard the submissions of Sri.Binoy Vasudevan, learned
counsel for the petitioner and having gone through the averments in the
writ petition and the documents particularly Ext.P1 judgment of the
civil court, I am of the view that the respondents are not justified in
insisting that door number will be assigned to the petitioner’s building
only after the appeal preferred by Sri.Krishnakumar is disposed of.
The counter claim submitted by Sri.Krishnakumar was regarding
certain portions of the building allegedly projecting into his property.
Even if the counter claim is ultimately decreed by the District Court
allowing the appeal preferred by Sri.Krishnakumar, the liability which
the petitioner will entail is only for demolishing those portions. In the
circumstances of this case, I am of the view that the Panchayat should
number the building subject to the outcome of the appeal preferred by
Sri.Krishnakumar.
WPC.No.28291/08 4
In the result, I direct the respondents to assign door number to the
residential building put up by the petitioner on the strength of permit
No.19/96-99, subject to the outcome of A.S.No.125/07 on the file of
the District Court, Palakkad. Numbering as directed above shall be
done within three weeks of petitioner producing a copy of this
judgment before the respondents. The petitioner is also directed to
send a copy of this judgment to Sri.Krishnakumar also by registered
post acknowledgment due as and when she receives the same.
PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE
JUDGE
sv.
WPC.No.28291/08 5