IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 18TH JULY 2011 / 27TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 18735 of 2011(N) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. M/S.BAVASONS CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD 41/237, IST FLOOR, V.B.M BAVA CHAMBERS PARAMARA ROAD, COCHIN-18. 2. V.M. LIAQUATH ALI, S/O. V.B.M BAVA,MANAGING DIRECTOR M/S.BAVASONS CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD . BY ADV. SRI.SHAJI P.CHALY, SRI.S.GOPAKUMAR, SRI.R.SANJITH. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER THRIKKAKKARA, KOCHI- 682 030. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THRIKKAKKARA POLICE STATION THRIKKAKKARA, KOCHI -682 030. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE THRIKKAKKARA POLICE STATION THRIKKAKKARA, KOCHI- 682 030. 4. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD THRIKKAKKARA, KOCHI- 682 030. REPRESENTED BY THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER. 5. N.M. ABDUL KAREEM, S/O.N.M. MUHAMMED,NADUVILEVALAMKKOTTIL, VIJOBHAVAN ROAD, B.M.C., PIN- 682 021. 6. N.K. KAREEM, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, NADUVILEVALAMKKOTTIL, VIJOBHAVAN ROAD, B.M.C., PIN 682 021. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.CHARISMA. R4 BY ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WP(C).No. 18735 of 2011(N) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT NO.427/09-10 ISSUED BY THE THRIKKAKKARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT DATED 30/10/2009. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE OCCUPANCY CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE THRIKKAKKARA MUNICIPALITY DATED 04/06/2011. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE RECEIPTS ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST & 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.18735 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of July, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Abdul Rehim, J. The 1st petitioner is a private limited company engaged in construction activities of multi-storied apartment complexes. The 2nd petitioner is the Managing Director of the 1st petitioner company. Issue pertains to a residential apartment complex being constructed by the 1st petitioner within the limits of Thrikkakara Municipality. It is alleged that the respondents 5 and 6 are causing obstruction to drawing of Electric line for providing connection to the apartment complex, through a public road leading to the compound. It is contended that the respondents 5 and 6 are raising objections under the pretext that by providing electric connection to the apartment complex, there will be deficiency in voltage in the area in question. According to the petitioner, such an apprehension is raised only as a W.P.(C).18735/11 -2- pretext to see that petitioner is obstructed from finishing the project and handing over the apartment to the customers, with an oblique motive of bargaining for undue gains and benefits. 2. In spite of service of notice from this court, the respondents 5 and 6 have not entered appearance and not chosen to contest the writ petition. Learned standing counsel appearing for 4th respondent Board, on the basis of instructions received, submitted that the drawing of electric line to the petitioners' premises was obstructed by respondents 5 and 6 and the 4th respondent Board has sought police protection for executing the work. It is submitted that, even after affording police protection respondents 5 and 6 are not permitting to complete the work and they are creating unlawful obstructions. 3. Learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondents 1 to 3 submitted that on the basis of complaint received from 4th respondent the police officials having jurisdiction on the local area took steps to have an W.P.(C).18735/11 -3- amicable settlement, which eventually failed. It is made clear that the police authorities are willing to afford adequate protection for executing the work of drawing the electric line for providing connection to the petitioners' premises. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances attendant, we are inclined to hold that respondents 5 and 6 have no manner of right to create any sort of obstruction to the drawing of electric line to the apartment complex being constructed by the 1st petitioner company. Respondents 5 and 6 could not be permitted to take law into their own hands and to create any obstruction under the guise of a complaint of apprehended fall of voltage in the area in question. It is for the 4th respondent to consider such apprehension if any raised and to take adequate measures to rectify deficiency in voltage of the electric supply if any caused in the area in question. 5. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondents 1 to 3 to afford adequate and W.P.(C).18735/11 -4- effective protection to the 4th respondent to complete the work of drawing of electric line to the premises of the apartment complex being constructed by the petitioners, within the limits of Thrikkakara Municipality, and to energise connection to the apartment complex. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb