IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 22ND MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 4483 of 2009(H) ------------------------------ PETITIONER: -------------- C.K.N. & CO., SREEKUMAR BUILDINGS, CHALAKKUDY - 680 307, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, K.P.MAN MOHAN. BY MR.K.I.ABDUL RASHEED, ADVOCATE. MR.K.A.SHAMSUDEEN, ADVOCATE. RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. THE CHALAKKUDY MUNICIPALITY, P.B. No. 22, CHALAKKUDY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE TALUK SURVEYOR, IRINJALAKKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY MR. M.P. ASHOK KUMAR, SC FOR R1. MR. P.N. SANTHOSH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.4483 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 11th day of February, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner claims to be the owner of the property covered by Exts.P1 & P2. It is stated that on the application made by him to the respondent Municipality, by Ext.P4 proceedings he was permitted to construct a compound wall. While, the work was in progress, the Municipality directed the petitioner to stop the work on the allegation that the construction was made encroaching into a portion of the puramboke land. Thereupon it is stated that the Municipality itself sought survey of the property as per Ext.P6 and the petitioner also made Ext.P7 to the 2nd respondent seeking to expedite the survey applied for. Orders have not been passed on the applications. It is in these circumstances, the writ petition is filed mainly praying for getting the property surveyed. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent Municipality. 3. Evidently, the case of the Municipality is that the petitioner has encroached into the puramboke property. This WP(C) No.4483/2009 -2- dispute can be resolved only if a proper survey is conducted. This is what is sought for by both the parties as per Exts.P6 & P7. Therefore, the 2nd respondent shall consider Exts.P6 & P7 and do the needful in the matter as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. It is directed that any survey to be conducted shall be with notice to both the parties. 4. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent for compliance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg