Shaji.K.A. vs The Moonilavu Grama Panchayat on 1 April, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 10619 of 2008(L)


1. SHAJI.K.A., S/O.ANTONY,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE MOONILAVU GRAMA PANCHAYAT,
                       ...       Respondent

2. JAMES JOSEPH, PARAKKAL HOUSE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.K.JAYAKUMAR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI

 Dated :01/04/2009

 O R D E R
                       V.GIRI, J
                     -------------------
                 W.P.(C).10619/2008
                     --------------------
          Dated this the 1st day of April, 2009

                     JUDGMENT

Petitioner entered into an agreement for

purchase of a property from its original owner one

Jalal. It seems that Jalal then sold the property to

the second respondent herein. According to the

petitioner, this was done in breach of the agreement

for sale which had earlier been executed by the

petitioner and Jalal. Petitioner then filed a Suit for

specific performance before the Sub Court as

O.S.No.54/2006. The said Suit was decreed and the

original owner and the subsequent purchaser were

directed to execute the sale deed in favour of the

petitioner, after receiving the balance sale

consideration. It is admitted that Ext.P1 judgment is

now challenged in an appeal, R.F.A.357/2007. There

is a stay of execution of the decree as well.

2. In the meanwhile, the second respondent put

W.P.(C).10619/2008
2

up a building in the property and sought for

numbering of the same. This was objected to by the

petitioner. Secretary of the Panchayat therefore,

proposed to conduct a hearing on Ext.P3 which has

been challenged in this writ petition.

3. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner,

learned counsel for the Panchayat and learned

counsel appearing for the second respondent.

4. I do not find any reason why further

proceedings pursuant to Ext.P3 should be

interdicted by this Court. It is upto the Panchayat

to number the building which has been constructed.

Numbering of the building is to be done with

reference to the provisions of the Panchayat Raj Act

and the Rules governing the same. Pendency of the

Civil Suit or an appeal arising therefrom, should

normally have no impact, except when there is an

allegation that the building has been put up in

W.P.(C).10619/2008
3

contravention of the order of injunction passed by

the Civil Court. Secretary shall proceed to take

appropriate steps pursuant to Ext.P2, in

accordance with law.

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

V.GIRI,
Judge

mrcs