Disputes on property encroachment and permits should be resolved in civil courts rather than through writ petitions when statutory rights are properly observed.

J U D G M E N T

This writ petition is filed seeking directions against respondents 1 and 2 to conduct an enquiry into Ext.P2 complaint and to take effective steps to stop the construction activities undertaken by the 3rd respondent. In Ext.P2 the petitioner raises complaint to the effect that, 3 persons mentioned therein have encroached into property belonging to the petitioner, comprised in Sy. No.101/21 having an extent of 12 cents, upon which the petitioner derived title by virtue of document No.6398/2005 of the Sub Registrar office, Edapally. It is alleged that those persons are attempting construction activities in the said property in violation of an order of interim injunction passed by the Munsiff court, Ernakulam, in O.S. No.1384/2005. Further allegation in Ext.P2 is that the Building Permit was granted for such construction without knowledge and information to the petitioner and that such a permit granted during pendency of the civil suit, is not sustainable. Hence the petitioner had made request before the 1st respondent to cancel the Building Permit and to take steps to demolish the building illegally constructed by those persons encroaching into the property of the petitioner.

2. When the writ petition came up for consideration on

13.02.2012, this court passed an interim order directing the respondents 1 and 2 to conduct an enquiry into the complaints in Ext.P2 and to take necessary steps for abrupt stoppage of the construction, if the 3rd respondent is doing such construction encroaching into the property belonging to the petitioner. The 3rd respondent had filed I.A.No.3711/2012, stating that pursuant to the interim order without conducting any enquiry as directed, the 2nd respondent had issued Ext.R3 (f) notice directing abrupt stoppage of the construction. In the affidavit filed in support of the above application, it is stated that the 3rd respondent had purchased the property having an extent of 4.86 Ares through Ext.R3(a) Sale Deed, during the year 2010, and that the said property is in absolute ownership and possession of the 3rd respondent. The 3rd respondent had obtained building permit for construction of a residential building in the property as per Ext. R3(d), as early as on 06.12.2010, and started construction of the building in January, 2011. It is further stated that the construction of the building is nearing completion. Ext.R3(e) is the photograph produced, revealing that the construction had reached a stage of completing the structural works. It is stated that the construction is being carried out strictly within the property purchased by the petitioner as per Ext.R3(a), which is comprised in Sy.Nos.101/17 and 101/20 and that the petitioner is not having any property in Sy.No.101/21.

3. Learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of respondents 1 and 2 submitted that, an inspection was conducted on the basis of Ext.P2, in compliance with the directions issued by this court on 13.02.2012. But it is noticed that no report regarding any such enquiry has been produced in this writ petition and that the result of such enquiry has not been revealed even in Ext.R3(f) notice.

4. The main relief sought for in this writ petition is for a direction for consideration and actions on the basis of Ext.P2. It is pertinent to note that the 3rd respondent herein, who is constructing the building is not the person cited in Ext.P2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the persons cited in Ext.P2 are the predecessors in interest of the 3rd respondent, who sold the property to the 3rd respondent. It is mentioned in Ext.P2 that the petitioner had filed a suit before the Munsiff Court against the persons mentioned in Ext.P2 alleging encroachment. Ext.P1 is the order of interim injunction obtained restraining the defendants therein from encroaching into the plaint 'A' Schedule property and from making any improvements therein, and also restraining from closing the access/ passage to the said property. It is p