IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 29TH JANUARY 2010 / 9TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 2991 of 2010(Y) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. ABDUL KHADER, S/O.K.T.KUNHIMON, AGED 67 YEARS, NIYAS VILLA, ORUMANAYOOR AMSOM AND DESOM, CHAVAKAD TALUK, PIN - 680 512. 2. MOHAMMED KUTTY, AGED 63 YEARS, S/O.K.T.HAMEED, RAIM MARAKARVEETTIL, KADAPPURAM DESOM AND AMSOM, CHAVAKAD TALUK, PIN - 680 514. BY ADV. SRI.JIJO PAUL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. COCHIN CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, COCHIN CORPORATION, KOCHI. 2. WTTIL J & CO. CHAMBERS, MUSCAT TOWER, ELAMKULAM, ERNAKULAM REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. 3. THE SECRETARY, COCHIN CORPORATION, KOCHI. MR.S.RAMESH BABU, SC FOR CORPORATION THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.2991 of 2010 (Y) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 29th day of January, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioners claim ownership of the property covered by Exts.P1 & P2 title deeds. According to them, they entered into an agreement with a person called Mr.P.C.Khader for the construction of a building in the plot, subject to the terms of the agreement. It is stated that building has been constructed and 44 rooms have been assigned to the petitioners. 2. The present grievance of the petitioners is that the 2nd respondent is attempting to install a mobile telecommunication tower on the roof of the building. It is contended that such an attempt is made on the strength of Ext.P3 permit and Ext.P4 assignment deed executed by Shri.Khader in favour of the 2nd respondent. 3. In this writ petition, the main grievance highlighted by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that although Ext.P3 building permit authorises installation of a diesel generator shelter WP(C) No.2991/2010 -2- room on the basement of the building, attempt is made to construct the aforesaid facility on the roof of the building. In so far as this grievance is concerned, what is noticed is that this issue is also covered in O.S.No.92/2010 filed by the petitioners before the Munsiff Court, Ernakulam, where the plaint C schedule is the roof of the building itself and the first prayer is for an injunction restraining the 2nd respondent defendant from effecting any construction over the plaint schedule properties. It is also the admitted position that though the petitioners have attempted to obtain an order of injunction from the Munsiff Court and were unsuccessful. Therefore, essentially what is revealed is that this is a parallel proceedings, which is impermissible. In view of the above, I am not inclined to grant any relief as sought for. This writ petition is accordingly dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg