High Court Kerala High Court

T.R.Kamalam vs The State Of Kerala Rep. By The on 27 January, 2009

Kerala High Court
T.R.Kamalam vs The State Of Kerala Rep. By The on 27 January, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 5205 of 2007(T)


1. T.R.KAMALAM,WIFE OF MADHAVAN,MADAVANA
                      ...  Petitioner
2. PADMAM CHANDRABANU, WIFE OF CHANDRABANU,
3. CHANDRABANU, SON OF MADHAVAN,MADAVANA

                        Vs



1. THE STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, FORT

3. THE CICLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALUVA.

4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALUVA

5. M.P.UDAYAN, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,

6. SURESH MUTTATHIL, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,

7. K.SHEKARAN, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,

8. P.V.SUBRAMANIYAN, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,

9. ABDUL JALEEL, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.B.PRADEEP

                For Respondent  :SRI.T.H.ABDUL AZEEZ

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :27/01/2009

 O R D E R
                         ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                         -----------------------------
                        W.P.(C) No. 5205 of 2007
                     --------------------------------------
                 Dated this the 27th day of January, 2009

                                JUDGMENT

Petitioners’ complaint is that the respondents 5 to 9 have

attempted to fill up a water channel passing through the boundary of

the petitioner’s property situated in resurvey nos. 216/1 and 216/2 and

219/1/2 of Aluva West Village and that as a result of this, the flow of

water is obstructed. On the basis of aforesaid allegation, the petitioner

has filed Exhibit P1 complaint before the second respondent. From the

counter affidavit filed by the second respondent, it is seen that the

receipt of complaint has been admitted and it is also evident from the

affidavit that final order in the matter has not been passed.

Therefore, I direct the second respondent to pass final orders on

Exhibit P1 complaint made by the petitioner alleging that respondents

5 to 9 have filled up the water channel. Orders shall be passed

expeditiously as possible at any rate within eight weeks of production

of copy of this judgment. In the meanwhile, the interim order passed by

this Court on 15/02/2007 and extended subsequently will remain in

force.

W.P.(C) No. 5205/2007
2

Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the

second respondent for compliance.

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE

scm