JUDGMENT

The petitioner owns 24 cents of property in Sy.No.2319 and

2320 of Thycaud Village in Thiruvananthapuram, obtained as per a partition deed document No.4610/1995 dated 10.10.1995 of SRO, Thiruvananthapuram. The petitioner is conducting a lodge by the name 'Greenland Lodging' in the building situated in the property. The 2nd respondent who owns the neighbouring property obtained a building permit on 28.07.2017 from the 1st respondent Corporation. The permit was for the construction of a five-storeyed commercial building in the property and on 31.10.2017 the 2nd respondent started pilling work on the property. According to the petitioner, the work was carried out by the 2nd respondent in total violation of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules (hereinafter referred to as KMBR). It is stated that after 20.12.2017 the pilling of the land was vigorously done, and deep excavation of the soil was also started which disturbed the lie and lateral support of the property of the petitioner. The petitioner submits that serious damage was caused to the lodging house of the petitioner. It is also stated that the 2nd respondent fixed a huge advertisement board masking the signboard of the petitioner's lodging house. On 26.12.2017, the petitioner preferred a complaint before the 1st respondent along with photographs, a copy of which is produced as Ext.P1. Thereafter the petitioner filed O.S.No.89/2018 before the Munsiff Court, Thiruvananthapuram praying for a permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the illegal construction of the 2nd respondent. The Munsiff Court passed an order directing the defendants in the suit to maintain status quo. An Advocate Commissioner was appointed by the Court and Ext.P2 is the report submitted by the Advocate Commissioner. Ext.P2 shows violations committed by the 2nd respondent in the matter of construction. The Munsiff Court later vacated the order of injunction for the reason that the proper remedy for the petitioner is to approach the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions in Kerala (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal). The petitioner has preferred CMA No.64/2018 before the District Court, Thiruvananthapuram challenging the order of the Munsiff Court. The District Court passed an order of injunction restraining the 2nd respondent from carrying out any construction work in the petition B Schedule property affecting lateral support, lie, etc. of the property and building of the petitioner. Ext.P3 is the order passed by the District Court. The petitioner also filed an appeal before the Tribunal, a copy of which has been produced as Ext.P4. Initially, the Tribunal passed an order restraining the 2nd and 3rd respondents from making any construction deviating from the approved plan and the building permit dated 28.07.2017.

2. An Advocate Commissioner was appointed by the Tribunal to conduct a site inspection and report on the points mentioned in the order. A retired Chief Town Planner (Vigilance) was also appointed as an expert, to assist the Advocate Commissioner. Ext.P5 is the report of the Commissioner and the expert, which again shows violations committed by the 2nd respondent in the matter of construction of the building in question. The 2nd respondent submitted objections to the Commission report. On 07.05.2019, based on the report of the Commissioner, the Tribunal vide Ext.P6 order, stayed the construction as per the building permit until further orders. The 2nd respondent approached this Court by filing W.P(C) No.14777/2019 seeking to set aside Ext.P6. There is also a prayer for a declaration that the 2nd respondent is entitled to construct the building as per the building permit and approved plan granted by the competent authority. On 19.09.2019, this Court disposed of W.P(C) No.14777/2019 by Ext.P7 judgment directing the Tribunal to finalise the appeal at the earliest, at any rate, within a month from 05.10.2019. In compliance with the directions of this Court in Ext.P7 judgment