IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2009 / 24TH ASHADHA 1931 WA.No. 1290 of 2009(H) ---------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.5152/2007 Dated 28/05/2009 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONERS ------------------------- 1. HAYARUNNISA BEEGUM, W/O.A.A.SAMED, NEELAGIRI, KOTTAKKAKAM, KOLLAM - 13. 2. A.A.SAMED, NEELAGIRI, KOTTAKKAKAM, KOLLAM-13 BY ADV. SRI.T.I.ABDUL SALAM RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. KOLLAM CORPORATION, KOLLAM, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE TAHESILDAR, KOLLAM 4. DISTRICT SURVEY SUPERINTENDENT, KOLLAM. BY SR.GOVT.PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA SRI.M.K.CHANDRA MOHAN DAS, SC. KOLLAM CORPORATION THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.R.BANNURMATH, C.J. & KURIAN JOSEPH,J. ------------------------------------------------- W.A.No.1290 of 2009 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT Kurian Joseph,J. The writ petitioners are the appellants. They approached this court challenging Exts.P4, P9 and P11 orders. There was also a prayer for a direction to the first respondent to regularise the lean to construction in accordance with the provisions of the Kerala Buildings (Regularisation of Unauthorised Construction and Land Development) Rules, 1999. The first petitioner claims to be the absolute owner of 11.150 cents of land in Chinnakada in Kollam town. The Corporation, in exercise of their power under Section 406(3) of the Kerala Municipality Act, proceeded against the alleged unauthorised construction. The learned single Judge, finding that there is a dispute on the title to the property, W.A.No.1290 of 2009 -:2:- dismissed the writ petition without prejudice to the liberty to the writ petitioners to establish their title before the civil court. Aggrieved, the petitioners have come up in appeal. In the meanwhile the alleged unauthorised construction has been demolished by the Corporation since the writ petitioners failed to comply with the direction to demolish the construction. They have also claimed the cost of demolition, namely Rs.5,150/- from the appellants. 2. After hearing counsel on both sides and having gone through the records available before us, we do not find any reason to take a different view from that is taken by the learned single Judge. We agree with the position that the writ petitioners will have to establish their title before the civil court. Therefore, we dispose of the writ appeal without prejudice to the liberty to the appellants to establish their title and ownership before the civil court. In order to enable the appellants to work out their remedy as above, we make it W.A.No.1290 of 2009 -:3:- clear that the status quo as on today with regard to the possession of the disputed property shall be maintained for a period of three months. The notice claiming the cost of demolition shall not be enforced till such time. The continuance of these orders beyond three months will depend on the orders to be passed by the civil court of competent jurisdiction. We also make it clear that we have not adverted to the contentions of the parties on merits including the maintainability of the remedy as above. S.R.BANNURMATH, Chief Justice KURIAN JOSEPH, Judge ahg. BANNURMATH, C.J. & KURIAN JOSEPH,J. --------------------------- W.A.No.1290 of 2009 ---------------------------- JUDGMENT 15th July, 2009