IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 6TH DECEMBER 2010 / 15TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 36305 of 2010(K) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- 1. DEVADAS, S/O.PERINGOTHRA VIJAYAN, AGED 46 YEARS, ALA DESOM, S.N.PURAM VILLAGE, KOTHAPARAMBU, KODUNGALLUR. 2. RAJITHA, W/O.DEVADAS, ALA DESOM, S.N.PURAM VILLAGE, KOTHAPARAMBU, KODUNGALLUR. BY ADV. SRI.A.S.RAJENDRAN NAIR RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. KODUNGALLUR MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY. 2. THE SECRETARY, KODUNGALLUR MUNICIPALITY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, KODUNGALLUR. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI. M.P.ASHOK KUMAR, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 36305 OF 2010 -------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of December, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioners who are husband and wife own adjacent parcels of land described in Ext.P1 sale deed in favour of the first petitioner and Ext.P2 sale deed in favour of the second petitioner. The petitioners purchased the properties on 24.10.2007. Recently, the Secretary of the Kodungallur Municipality issued Ext.P4 notice dated 20.11.2010 calling upon the petitioners to restore a thodu, which the Municipality claims was in existence in the property. It is stated that even before the period of one week mentioned therein expired, the officers of the Kodungallur Municipality along with the men employed by them trespassed into the petitioners' lands and cut open a chal through their property. In this writ petition, the petitioners seek a direction to the respondents not to interfere with the steps taken by them to restore the land to its original stage. The petitioners also pray for a declaration that the Kodungallur Municipality has no right to cut open a thodu or drainage through their lands. 2. A reading of the Ext.P4 indicates that the contention of the local authority is that a thodu was in existence in the land belonging to the petitioners through which the water from the bus stand and market used to flow to the Canoly canal. It is also evident from Ext.P4 that the petitioners or their predecessors-in-interest had covered the thodu after laying a pipe through which water used to flow to the canal. Ext.P4 also WPC No.36305/2010 2 discloses that it has resulted in flooding of the bus stand and market during the monsoons. It is also evident from the pleadings and the materials presently on record that the municipal authorities have restored the thodu to its original state. If the petitioners are aggrieved by the action of the respondents, their remedy in my opinion is to approach the competent civil court seeking appropriate reliefs including a mandatory injunction directing the respondents to restore the lands to its original state. A determination of the question as to whether the neighbouring land owners had a right to have the surface water drained through the petitioners' land and whether a thodu was in existence in the petitioners' land, will require oral and documentary evidence to be adduced. I therefore find no grounds to entertain this writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to move the competent civil court seeking redressal of their grievances. P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) vps WPC No.36305/2010 3 WPC No.36305/2010 4