HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P. G. Ajithkumar, J
ABDUL NAZAR – Appellant
Versus
MANNARKKAD MUNICIPALITY – Respondent
WP(C)/12153/2022
Prohibition - Building Constructions - Kerala Municipality Act - Section 383A - The court interpreted Section 383A, concluding it did not apply to renovation of pre-existing structures. Key legal provision allows for certain constructions on existing buildings, informing the decision to set aside the order against the petitioner.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner owned two properties with buildings constructed in 1960. After a part was demolished for road widening, the petitioner began renovations but was cited for violating Section 383A of the Municipality Act regarding new constructions. The petitioner contested this citation claiming it was only a renovation.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that Section 383A did not apply as the petitioner was strengthening an existing structure rather than constructing a new one. The renovation was allowable under the Act's proviso concerning existing buildings.
Issues: Whether Section 383A of the Kerala Municipality Act applies to the petitioner’s renovation of an existing building rather than to new construction.
Ratio Decidendi: Section 383A applies to new constructions only; thus, the petitioner’s renovations, being a strengthening of an existing building, fell outside its purview.
Final Decision: The court set aside Ext.P7 and directed reconsideration of the matter without the constraints of Section 383A.
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed with the following prayers:
i. Issue a writ of certiorari or appropriate writ or order quashing Ext.P7 order issued by the 1st respondent.
ii. Declare that the prohibition regarding distance under Section 383A of the Municipality Act, 1994 is not applicable to a building constructed prior to 1960.
iii. Declare that the prohibition of construction within 3 meter distance from the road end under Section 383A of the Municipality Act, 1994 is applicable only to the new construction.
iv. Direct the respondents to issue occupancy certificate to the petitioner for the building situated in Sy.No.19/4, 19/5, 19/10 of Mannarkad 1 Village, Mannarkkad Taluk which was renovated and strengthened which was partly demolished for road widening.
v. Direct the respondents to regularize the construction/renovation of the building situated in Sy.No.19/4, 19/5, 19/10 of Mannarkad 1 Village, Mannarkkad Taluk.
2. The petitioner owned two items of landed property extending 5.26 ares in Sy.No.19/4, 19/5, 19/10 of Mannarkkad Village, Mannarkkad Taluk. According to the petitioner, in these land, there were two old buildings constructed in 1960. There were 16 rooms in these buildings and the building was lying contiguously with a single structure. The petitioner was prompt in remitting the building tax and property tax. In the year 2018, as part of widening of National Highway between Kunthippuzha to Nellippuzha in Mannarkkad Town, it is submitted that a portion of the petitioner's building was demolished by the revenue authorities. The demolished portion of the building is extending 0.009075 Hectors in Sy.No.78/1. Because of the negligent manner of the demolition, it is submitted that, the remaining portion of the building has also got damaged. Hence the renovation work was started. At that time, 2nd respondent issued a notice under Section 406(1), (2) of the Kerala Municipality Act . In reply to Ext.P3 show cause notice, the petitioner has explained the nature of renovation work made in the building. As suggested by the Municipality, the petitioner reduced the measurement of the veranda by cutting 1.4 cms of its width. The petitioner renovated the existing building strictly in accordance with the provisions of and Rules, petitioner submits. While so, the respondents issued Ext.P7 order, in which it is stated that there is violation of Section 383A of the . Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent Municipality.
4. The counsel for the petitioner reiterated his contentions in the writ petition. The counsel submitted that Section 383A of the Municipality Act is not applicable in this case because there is no new construction. It is only strengthening of an existing structure.
5. The counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that there is violation of Section 383A and that is why Ext.P7 is issued. 6. This Court considered the contentions of the petitioner and the respondents. The main issue is whether is applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case. It will be better to extract and the first proviso to of the Kerala Municipality Act .
383A. Prohibition of constructions abutting the public roads.— Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, no person shall construct any building or structure other than a compound wall in any land abutting any National Highway, State Highway, District Road or any other roads notified by the Municipality within a distance of three metres from the road boundary of his land abutting the road:
Provided that the said limit of three metres shall not be applicable for the construction, subject to the Building Rules, of first floor or second floor or of both upon a building, existing on the date of coming into force of this Act:
7. Section 383A only says that no person shall construct any building or structure other than a compound wall in any land abuttin
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.