Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Amit Rawal, P. V. Balakrishnan, JJ
David P.V., S/o. P.C. Varghese – Appellant
Versus
V.M. Abdul Shukoor, S/o. V.M. Moosa – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Amit Rawal, J.
1. This order shall dispose of six(6) writ appeals arising out of the common judgment dated 11.04.2024 in W.P.(C)No.5712 of 2023 (first writ petition) and W.P. (C)No.23754 of 2023 (second writ petition). W.A.No.780 of 2024 and W.A.No.684 of 2024 arise out of the decision in W.P.(C)No.23754 of 2023; and W.A.No.683 of 2024 and W.A.No.812 of 2024 arise out of W.P.(C)No.5712 of 2023 whereas W.A.Nos.1072 of 2024 and 1679 of 2024 have been filed by the third parties seeking leave of this Court to challenge the aforesaid judgment, claiming to be the other co-owners who are supporting the respondents, in the original writ petitions/appellants in the other intra court appeals.
2. Facts leading to the filing of the two writ petitions are enumerated hereinbelow:
First writ petition was filed by nine(9) petitioners i.e., V.M.Abdul Shukoor and Others against Corporation of Cochin, its Secretary and Assistant Executive Engineer as respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Reethamma, Ealikutty, Joseph Koluthara, Antony Koluthara and George Koluthara as respondent Nos.4 to 8. The reliefs claimed in the aforementioned writ petition were as under:
“i) Call for the records leading to Exhibits P1
Building permits must comply with statutory provisions, and challenges to such permits must be timely; delay may waive the right to contest approvals.
Exemptions from building rules must comply with procedural requirements; failure to provide natural justice in administrative decisions warrants judicial intervention.
The High Court cannot entertain a writ petition against an appealable order if the statutory period for filing an appeal has expired, reaffirming that adherence to statutory limitations is essential ....
Penalty for construction delay under lease quashed due to delays from court stay, statutory approvals, additional area; writ maintainable for arbitrary state action; 6-year extension non-discriminato....
The court emphasized the importance of planned development and the need to address unauthorized constructions. It also highlighted the right of the petitioners, as owners, to be heard before the orde....
NOCs issued before KMBR enforcement retain validity; builders can apply for renewal under Rule 15A despite obtained NOC, which does not equate to a permit.
Additional premium demand for construction delay under lease held arbitrary where caused by statutory approvals, late commencement certificates, and extra built-up area without timeline; applicable s....
Statutory authorities must act in accordance with the law, and courts cannot restrain them from exercising their duties.
Supplementary lease deeming additional built-up area integral with no time limit overrides original four-year completion clause for composite construction; penalty demands arbitrary, illegal; payment....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
