IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH OCTOBER 2008 / 7TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 21443 of 2008(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.V. PADMANABHAN, PRESIDENT, INDIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS, PULLUR PERIYA PANCHAYAT, P.O. HARIPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. PULLUR PERIYA GRMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. VINOD KUMAR, S/O E.P. NAMBIAR, PALLAYIL VEEDU, GENERAL CONVENER, PRIYADARSHINI SMARAKA KETTIDA NIRMANA COMMITTEE, HARIPURAM P.O., ANANDASRAMAM (VIA),, KASARGOD DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.T.MADHU FOR R1 SRI.K.RAJEEVAN FOR R1 SRI.P.O.THOMAS FOR R1 SRI.A.SAIN PAUL FOR R1 SRI.P.R.SHIBU FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: W.P.C.NO. 21443/2008. ------------------------------------------------------------------- EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT. EXT.P2 BUILDING PERMIT DT. 18-1-2005. EXT.P3 COMMUNICATION DT. 5-1-2008. EXT.P4 APPLICATION DT. 27-11-2007. EXT.P5 PLAINT IN O.S.NO. 122/2008 BEFORE MUNSIFF COURT, HOSDURG. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: -------------------------------------- EXT.R1(a) WRITTEN STATEMENT DT. 17-7-2008. EXT.R1(b) WRITTEN STATEMENT IN O.S.122/2008. EXT.R1(c) PROCEEDINGS DT. 12-3-2008. [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 21443 of 2008 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 29th October, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner constructed a building with a permit issued from the 1st respondent-Panchayat . After completion, the petitioner applied for completion certificate and occupancy certificate. Since there was no reply to the application within the period specified, by virtue of the provisions of the Panchayat Raj Act, he is entitled to issue of completion and occupancy certificates, is the contention raised by the petitioner in this writ petition. The petitioner therefore submits that he has become entitled to get the building numbered and seeks the following reliefs: “(i) Declare that completion certificate and occupancy certificate are deemed to have been granted to the petitioner in pursuant to Exhibit P4. (ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 1st respondent to assign door number to the building constructed as per Exhibit P2.” 2. The learned counsel for the Panchayat submits that the building has not been numbered only because the building has been constructed on a permit issued to the petitioner and the 2nd respondent jointly and now in respect of title to the property, there is a civil suit pending before the petitioner and the 2nd respondent, in which the Panchayat is also a party. Otherwise the Panchayat has no objection in numbering the building. 3. Despite service of notice, none appears on behalf of the 2nd respondent. 4. I am of opinion that the pendency of the civil suit need not stand in the way of the Panchayat numbering the building in so far as the numbering of the building will not have any effect on the suit as such. Whether title is ultimately declared in favour of either the petitioner or the 2nd respondent, the person who wins the suit cannot W.P.C. No. 21443/08 -: 2 :- have any objection in numbering of the building. In fact, it would be advantageous to the person who wins the suit also if the building is numbered and if ultimately he is to get the building also if so decreed by the civil court. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent to number the building taking it that by virtue of the provisions of the Panchayat Raj Act, completion certificate and occupancy certificate are deemed to have been granted for the building pursuant to Ext. P4. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/