THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.16557 OF 2009 18th November 2009 Between: Sri Bhavaraju Venkata Surya Balarama Rao, S/o.B.V.Hanumantha Rao. …PETITIONER AND Municipal Corporation, Kakinada, East Godavari District, rep.by Commissioner and one other. …RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.16557 OF 2009 ORDER: The petitioner submitted an application to the Municipal Corporation, Kakinada, with a request to permit him to construct building on a site in T.S.No.16, Ward No.1, Block No.7, Kondayyapalem, Kakinada. Permission was accorded on 23.03.2009. The second respondent submitted a complaint to the Corporation on 22.06.2009. It was stated that the property, on which the construction is proposed, is the subject matter of C.M.A.No.21 of 2008 on the file of the III Additional Judge, Kakinada, and that the permission ought not to have been granted. Taking the same into account, the first respondent passed an order dated 17.07.2009, directing that the permission dated 23.03.2009 is kept in abeyance. The petitioner was directed not to proceed with the construction. The petitioner challenges the same. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the first respondent and the learned counsel for the second respondent. It is not in dispute that the property, on which the construction is proposed, is the subject matter of a partition suit being O.S.No.238 of 1978 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada. In the preliminary decree, the shares were determined. In the final decree, the petitioner was allotted the site in question except to the extent of 1/24th share of the second respondent, his brother and sister put altogether. Since the share of 1/24 would be too meager, the final decree mandated that the petitioner shall deposit the market value, as on the date of the final decree, within a period of three {3} months. The petitioner, however, did not deposit that amount. Therefore, he cannot claim exclusive rights over the property nor can he be directed to deposit the value of 1/24th share, as per the rates prevailing on the date of final decree. Equity and fair play demands that the market value prevailing as of now must be paid. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing that in case the petitioner deposits rest of 1/24th share of the plot, as per the market value prevailing now, the impugned order shall stand set aside. The deposit shall be made to the credit of O.S.No.238 of 1978 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ (L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J) 18th November 2009 Note: CC in one week B/O RRB