IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 23RD AUGUST 2011 / 1ST BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 22075 of 2011(H) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ SUHARA, AGED 65 YEARS, W/O.HAMSA, C.C.3/872, CHAKKARAIDUKKU DESOM, MATTANCHERRY VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.A.X.VARGHESE, SRI.A.V.JOJO. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MATTANCHERRY POLICE STATION, PIN-682 002. 2. BAVA, S/O.PAREEKUTTY MUSALIAR, P.B.NO.52, 3/408, PUTHIYA ROAD, NEAR MATHIRAPALLI, MATTANCHERRY, KOCHI-682 002. * ADDL. R3 IMPLEADED ADDL.R3: THE MANAGER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM. * IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS ADDL.R3 AS PER ORDER DATED 12.08.2011). R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.C.M. CHARISMA. ADDL. R3 BY ADV. SRI.SATHISH NINAN, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/08/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WP(C).No. 22075 of 2011(H) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 31/12/2009. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 04/02/2011. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 10/05/2010. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 08/08/2011. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE PRESENT CONDITION OF THE PETITIONER'S HOUSE. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JJ. ------------------------------- WP(C).NO. 22075 of 2011 --------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of August, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose ,J. The petitioner a 65 year old woman who claims to be in occupation of building CC.No.III/872 for more than 50 years has approached this court seeking police protection in the matter of renovating the above building free of all obstructions from the 2nd respondent who is said to be a neighbor. On considering this writ petition for admission and on hearing the submissions of Sri. A.V.Jojo, learned counsel for the petitioner who submitted that the petitioner does not have any ownership over the building in question and the ownership vests presently with the State Bank of Travancore, we impleaded the State Bank of Travancore as additional 3rd respondent. Today we have heard the submissions of Sri.Jojo as well as the learned counsel appearing for the State Bank of Travancore Sri. Sathish Ninan. We also heard the learned Government Pleader Smt.C.M.Charisma. Sri. Sathish Ninan for the Bank submitted that it is true that the petitioner is WP(C).22075/2011 2 in occupation of door No.III/872. Sathish Ninan submitted that the claim of the petitioner that she is in occupation of building having door No.III/872 appears to be true, the Bank will not have any objection in the above building being renovated by the petitioner on the strength of proper permit to be issued by the local authority, Corporation of Cochin. This should be on condition that such renovation will not cause any prejudice to the bank's proprietary interest over the building. The case of the petitioner is that the 2nd respondent is a neighbor and it is he who is obstructing the above construction inspite of Ext.P3 report submitted by the Revenue Divisional officer considering Ext.P1 complaint submitted by the petitioner. The 2nd respondent could not be served as notice which was sent to him by this court was returned with the endorsement that door No.3/408, Puthiya Road, Mattanchery where the 2nd respondent is shown as residing does not exist. 2. Having gone through the materials produced along with the writ petition particularly Ext.P5 series of photographs we are convinced that the condition of building having door No.3/872 in respect of which the petitioner claims WP(C).22075/2011 3 reliefs is rather dangerous. At the same time we cannot allow the petitioner to renovate the above building in view of the stand taken by owner State Bank of Travancore that the petitioner is yet to be issued with a permit by the local authority. We direct the petitioner to apply to the Corporation of Cochin and obtain permit for doing the necessary renovation work of building No.3/872 on the strength of her possessory title or occupancy title. The additional 4th respondent is directed to enquire into and take a decision on any application or permit for renovating the building having Door No.3/872 without delay and at any rate within one month of receiving application. Before taking final orders on that application notice be issued to the 2nd respondent also. Once the petitioner is issued with a permit for renovation the 1st respondent will afford necessary protection to the petitioner for carrying out the renovation work in case the same is obstructed by the 2nd respondent. 3. It is made clear that the grant of permit and doing of renovation work on the strength of permit will not cause any prejudice to the proprietary interest of the State Bank of Travancore as the owner of the building. WP(C).22075/2011 4 The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE pmn/ WP(C).22075/2011 5