IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 950 of 2010(P)
1. N.KULANTHAVEL
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE VANDENMEDU GRAMA PLANCHAYAT
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.S.SACHITHANANDA PAI
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :12/01/2010
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
================
W.P.(C) NO. 950 OF 2010 (P)
=====================
Dated this the 12th day of January, 2010
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner says that people in his neighbourhood wanted to
widen a pathway passing through his property into a road.
According to him, apprehending tresspass and damage, he filed
OS No.75/09 before the Munsiff’s Court, Kattapana, in which
Ext.P2 order of injunction was passed by the Court. According to
the petitioner, faced with Ext.P2 order and in order to defeat the
same, on the influence of the defendants in the suit, the
respondent Panchayat has now resolved to widen the pathway
into a road. It is aggrieved by this resolution, the writ petition is
filed praying for a direction to the Panchayat not to encroach into
the property of the petitioner covered by Ext.P2 order of
injunction or make any illegal constructions.
2. The resolution of the Panchayat which is stated to have
been passed is not placed on record. Even otherwise, if there is
any such resolution, it is open to the petitioner to seek the
statutory remedies. Apart from all this, on the materials produced,
I have no reason to think that the Panchayat will commit any
WPC 950/10
:2 :
illegality as apprehended by the petitioner.
Be that as it may, I dispose of this writ petition leaving it
open to the petitioner to seek his statutory remedies against the
resolution which is stated to have been passed by the Panchayat.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp