IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 9690 of 2009(E)
1. SMT. UMMU SALMAL, AGED 72 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE PATHANAMTHITTA MUNICIPALITY,
... Respondent
2. THE SECRETARY PATHANAMTHITTA
3. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR(L.A),
4. THE TAHSILDAR, PATHANAMTHITTA.
5. THE TALUK SURVEYOR, KOZHENCHERRY.
6. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PATHANAMTHITTA.
For Petitioner :SRI.S.SHANAVAS KHAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :26/03/2009
O R D E R
S. Siri Jagan, J.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
W. P (C) No. 9690 of 2009
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dated this, the 26th March, 2009.
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner has filed this writ petition alleging that in the
guise of taking possession of certain properties acquired on behalf of
the 1st respondent, the Municipality has encroached into petitioner’s
property. The petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs:
“(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or
direction directing the respondents 1 and 2 to not to interfere
with the petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of
property situated in Survey No. 259/1-5 of Pathanamthitta Village
and not to trespass into the same and commit acts of waste
therein and
(ii) To declare that respondents 1 and 2 have no manner or of
right whatsoever over the petitioner’s property situated in Survey
No. 259/1-5 of Pathanamthitta Village and
(iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or
direction directing the respondents 1 and 2 to pay compensation
of Rs.50,000/- to the petitioner for the loss sustained by her due to
their illegal action.”
2. Standing counsel for the Municipality submits that the
Municipality has not encroached into the petitioner’s property but
they have only taken possession of the property which has been
acquired and handed over to the Municipality by the land acquisition
authority. This is a dispute regarding the title to the property, which
cannot be resolved in a writ petition. The remedy of the petitioner
W.P.C. No. 9690/2009. -: 2 :-
lies in filing an appropriate suit for the reliefs prayed for. Therefore,
without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to seek remedies in a
suit, the writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge.
Tds/
[True copy]
P.S to Judge.