IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN FRIDAY, THE 23RD JANUARY 2009 / 3RD MAGHA 1930 RP.No. 1199 of 2008(V) ---------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.28951/2005 Dated 30/07/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): RESPONDENT NO.6: -------------------------------------- SARAMMA CHERIAN, W/O.CHERIAN, KALARICKAL HOUSE, NEAR S.C.S.JUNCTION, KATTOOKKARA MURI, THIRUVALLA, NOW RESIDING AT FLAT NO.3D, SHARON NEST, VAZHAKKALA P.O., ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.JOHN JOSEPH SRI.E.J.THOMAS SMT.THANUJA ROSHAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS NOS. 1 TO 5: --------------------------------------- 1. M.C.JOSEN, MOOTHEDATH HOUSE, NEAR S.C.S.JUNCTION, KATTOOKKARA MURI, THIRUVALLA. 2. CHERIAN THOMAS, KIZHAKKE KOVOORU, NEAR S.C.S.JUNCTION, KATTOOKKARA MURI, THIRUVALLA. 3. THOMAS.P.KOVOOR, KOVOOR VADAKKEPURAYIL, NEAR S.C.S.JUNCTION, KATTOOKKARA MURI, THIRUVALLA. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE CHAIRMAN, THIRUVALLA MUNICIPALITY. 6. THE SECRETARY, THIRUVALLA MUNICIPALITY. 7. THE TOWN PLANNER, PATHANAMTHITTA. R1 AND R3 BY ADV. SRI. P. HARIDAS R5 AND R6 BY ADV. SRI. JACOB MATHEW MANALIL THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & V.K. MOHANAN, JJ. -------------------------------------------- R.P. No. 1199 OF 2008 IN W. P. C. NO. 28951 OF 2005 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2009 O R D E R Ramachandran Nair,J. Heard counsel for the Review Petitioner and counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 3 and counsel for the Municipality. We do not find any ground to review the judgment. We feel review petitioner can be permitted to construct the compound wall by retaining the same width of the road which is available in the east and west of his property with reference to the adjoining compound walls of two buildings. In other words, the width of the road to be retained is the width available in the road from the compound wall of the old building very close to electric post on the east and similarly on the western side, the same width from the old building in the west should be retained at all places in front of petitioner's building. Petitioner will construct the compound wall by retaining uniform width as above. In other words, the decision 2 of the Municipality taken on 22.4.2005 to permit construction of the compound wall in line with the compound wall of the buildings in the west and east of the petitioner's building stands confirmed. Municipality will oversee the construction of the compound wall in accordance with the judgment as modified in this order. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (V. K. MOHANAN) Judge. kk 3