IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 21ST OCTOBER 2010 / 29TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 17294 of 2010(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- UNNIKRISHNAN, AGED 62, S/O.VALIYATTIL KARAPAKUTTY, THANISSERY P.O. IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. LOCAL SELF GOVT.DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE KARALAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, KARALAM P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. NANDAKUMAR @ THANKAPPAN, S/O.KURUVEETTIL LAKSHMIAMMA, THANISSERY DESOM, MANAVALASSERY VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. ADV. SRI.K.G.BALASUBRAMANIAN FOR R3 MR.DILEEP MOHAN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1 SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR FOR R2 SMT.P.A.ANITHA FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.17294/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF PLAINT IN O.A.NO.779/09 DATED 25/06/09 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, IRINJALAKUDA. P2 : COPY OF COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND PLAN IN EXT.P1 SUIT DATED 03/07/2009. P3 : COPY OF ORDER PASSED BY R2 DATED 05/08/2009. P4 : COPY OF FURTHER COMMUNICATION BY R2 DATED 03/12/2009. P5 : COPY OF WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN EXT.P1 SUIT DATED 22/08/09. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.17294 of 2010 (J) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 21st day of October, 2010 J U D G M E N T Challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P4 order passed by the 2 nd respondent rejecting an application made by the petitioner for a building permit, on the ground that in respect to the access to the property in question, a suit filed by the 3 rd respondent is pending before the Munsiff Court, Irinjalakkuda. 2. Ext.P1 is the plaint in O.S.No.779/2009, from which it is seen that the 3 rd respondent is seeking a declaration of exclusive ownership over the pathway in question. In my view, the fact that the suit is pending, need not have stood in the way of the Panchayat while considering the application made by the petitioner on merits, for the reason that any decision that the Panchayat takes on the application will be enforceable, but however, the same will be subject to the out come of the suit. In that view of the matter, quashing Ext.P3 and P4, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 2 nd respondent to consider the WP(C) No.17294/2010 -2- application made by the petitioner for building permit and pass appropriate orders thereon, with notice to the petitioner and the 3rd respondent. However, it is clarified that if the order passed is one enabling the petitioner to proceed with the construction, it should be made clear that such order/permit will be subject to the orders in the aforesaid suit, which is pending. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg