This WA. is filed under Section 4 of the
High Court Act, 1961, prayirzg ':9 set aside the {;:ft1sr"da{s{1
19.8.2008 passed by the learned Single. J
W.P.N<3.1Z we/2008.
This WA coming up for Pr¢:iiii1i1:a.r_§f.'
Court this day, SABHAHFI' J., deli'e{ere:;§st;I%;1e'fQ1}o€x:iAr1g;'-ss..__A :,j
JUD§}h_§ENT- Z
This appeal is filed W.P.N0.
3 1106/2008 being VA order dated
19.8.2008, wherem has declined
to interfere and reserved an
opp<):'tL13£§s't#x';»%'Vs£s; Qztproach the Civil Court of
a competfint ss'juI*is<i'ir3'£i,¢si"3 'ts workout his renmdy 1'31
accorcljgamzs with azjsi accordingly the writ petition has
bless;-ejefizlgd} " « V
2. _f:*i1eéq§;5g~:1iax:: filed W.?.N'0.I11(}6/2088 sseking for
the order passed by the 21% respondent,
Engineer, Mangalore City Corporatien, dated
. K and for & direction to the respondents to restcvrs
\,_/9
the clesed drainage system form-:~:ti’ -mg the 5;; ‘
reinsmlfing 69 Rec Hume Pipes (S_p_1§_%;’A’pipés}_A.Qf.
size of 3% feet breadth andV8–!f§””feet lV.e£?«.g1;;’1T<_5':é3M<;'V§1:* Wt:(§' §:0veI:'
the ogen drain of 285 ..feet,é.A"i?ii§_¢}§V ""p§ss<§S'"i:;i;I'<;z,1gh the
scheduie propéifi' and Rs. 10 iakhs
suffered by 1:13;. handed act of
the z*esponc}e3fit'};4;_;'~-. petition that the
P€*1iti0¥1§°*1'/ ;3'1«;'~"t5_"é'ii't',::<=:re<:i into an ageement
for bearing Sy..I\§o.6§/3
measugfing 48 ~Vc¢1:ts'v~.sifu.é1téd in Kadri village of Martgalore
zhasV p2'1i£i" tile entire: sale consideration in
Ihyaur' ' Aszéildors and the vendors have executed
' V' p0ws?er4:'&:fatt{§f:§1é;§; in favour of the petitioner 03:1 31.8.2GO5.
fI'iaereait£:r, 3~ the petitianer formed a layout. in the said
after obtaining necessary pennission imm thtit
éqggijfiiflflt authorities. It is avexrad that there is a drain
fifiaintaifled by the City Corporation, Mangaiere, which
passes in 33;. No.65/8 and the approximate: length and
K.)
breadth of the drain is about 286 feet
respectively. Because of the flow of con£a11 fi;1at?§d ?.3_.v;ite:i
and fiithy crontents and staglaticffx ' sawagé
poixzts and the said drain is_a_ Iivi13gA_;§}aoe fat'.
and are likely to cause: dangefdLfiV;S:%d.iseaées;A_": 'i'7}%1e p€t§tioneI*
formed a layout. éaroperties
purchased by a closed
drainage systeafii pipes. Keeping
the approachad the
Mangalora, seeking
perI11issi(§i;._f:{; length spun pipe line with a
Width pf 7. feéi: 'a:jci"'he'V'pr:caposed to install two RCO spun
each pipe is having a width of 3% feet
feei. As per the progosal, 69 RC6}
_pipes""–.w<i:;*é -zfiquireci to cover 285 feet drain ans} also
fill mud for abet}: 5 feet height on the Hume
'pips! {(2 put 6 inch bouiders on $116 mud and to form a
V[ ifoacsl ts ingess and egress from the layout. The p€titiOfl(31"
K)
action at thfi instan<;e of political clams and passed the
order dated 13.6.2008 asking the petitioner to I'€_3I1,(V)'i?'{§§~1'._I1€
RCO Huxne pipes, which causetd obstr13ction_.§2?§§.4'fi*駫;–:
of dyainage water and restore Vt».1}<%;_ I3€i:{3.g '
aggrieved by the said order, the fiiéél
petitien f{.)}f' the aforesaid re1ie'3§'."~-
3. Learned Single ;J11dgé;’c5,””_’VA the
contentions of the cc:uI1s§-.3; pet:i*£i0n<~:r, by
order ciated hc:1c?.£: allegations made
against 1".he= the reaim of fact fnlciizag,
which can 1§§e._§'a1'z*i{§€*:::i'4V€;z1; éffizr a full fledged trial and catmot
be cc}11i?e:3;ie::1%t1}7 'aé3'«L1.¢;ii£:ated upon in 3 Wfit proceedings by
'–:iir{:rt:tix}giv._j:§1ra{~§é.i1:'ti<3s to file afiidavits and the fact as to
whétiidr ';§ié;'tifioner cammitted brsach of taimins and
'<:()nciitio;r.1;3=;of the permission to lay hume pipes to form a
Ci0e':§éd"~Wat6r zirain; Whether there was breach of terms of
and sa;}51e{h€r the petitioner has suffered any
KJ
cizmzage and is entitled for damages carmot in
proceedings under Articles 226 of the
India. 'I'heref0re, the Iealned
the disputsd questions of fact
competent Civil Court and the Writ
patition by order dates} ag§;r ?ie;'ed by the
said order dismigsing 19.8.2008,
the writ petifio§1é;€;:'E:i'a$ Vapggéeal.
4. We vth€j’.V1fiQ»fiA1’i3.é#1’~V¢<iiunse1 appéaring for the
appeIlaI:£t_ ::C§f.#1¢1.I1S€§l appeagltizag for the
respcmdenté;–.. _V % –
C(l;1iZ{1S€I appealring for the
herein; submittfid that the action
2 takexr.by…_”t}:é::”‘ respondents by order dated 13.6.2008 is
W 4.4″iT£V1:£:ga.1__ arid: the petitioner has not commitied breach of
Qfindiudns and has suffered damage and the learned
VT Sirxgle Judge ought to have aliowed the Writ pefjtierz.
‘V3’
6. We have given carefui .r1_’ ‘ 3:213:
contentions urged by the learned Coulzsehlfl fa{r__ ‘
tha appellant and scrutinized the fi1§é.t€:1’is.I’o:1i _
2?. The material on recorci’§i2L{>;1}d i’:}t=:ar§y that the” ‘
averments made in to the
questions as 1:0 :x.?he:1″;I*i”e:; -tii:e__V has committed
breach afterms uiidertaken
to compiy huxne pipes had
caused A’ :€1:»;fl\x2.s::’. drainage water and
Whetherflue Iszyfiféred any damaga in View sf
the action i3ya ‘1;Eie:’..’Lresp0ndents are flhfi disputed
_._quest;ié::1s_?Ac;:I.’Vfact”a2:zri___the Same cannot be gong into a wtrit
‘f;;:1’c);(ie3dir1g:-3.;’«v_ T’ft1e:’ef0r$, the: iearned Single Judgfi has
1*igI’it1.§;’V%i1eiCI;TtV}1e reliefs sought far by the patitiormr can
‘ ‘Ex: §”El.i”1i6;:i«:_OIV1i}-‘ after detaii investigation to the qttestions
f’a.bt:?. by the Civii Cnurt. No gmtmd is made out for
.___”§;§;1té;:’ference under Articie 226 of tile Constitution af lndia.
\r9~
Acccmtiingly we haici that the order passed by the Eéésfied
Single Judge is justifiad and does not
ermr or fiiegaiity as to C2111 fer interférence. ,_ii’:._ti2i:$ .jI:?4r3–« ,
court appeal. Accorciirxgiy, we ixoiifii
devoid ofmerit. and pass the f{;J1§>Wi1é”i’g;’_ ‘ ‘. A . V
o:e13%1§’}1§.V?V %
The writ appeal ._ :4 ._ ~ . % _
A & sd/-
""" C11i5*f.Tustice %%%%% .Tudg3 ii:d::V*:x~: "flu . V _:~~