SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 5714

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.Kunhikrishnan, J
P.T. MANUEL – Appellant
Versus
THE THRISSUR CORPORATION – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 20645 OF 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Smt.Amrina Fathima, Sri.J.Ramkumar, Smt.Ambily K.N., Shri.Bijin B.
For the Respondents: Shri.Santhosh P.Poduval

The petitioner is entitled to deemed building permit if all application defects are cured as per applicable laws.

Headnote:The petitioner seeks to quash Exhibit P3 communication and secure a building permit under Section 394 of the Kerala Municipality Act. The court finds that the application for building permit was processed and directed the Corporation to act upon any cured defects. The main issue is whether a deemed building permit can be granted despite acknowledged defects. The court observed, if defects are resolved, action must be taken within 30 days of curing deficiencies stated in Exhibit P3.

Table of Content
1. petition filed for building permit application correction. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court observed on processing application after defect resolution. (Para 3)

JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers :

i) “Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or order quashing Exhibit P3 communications issued by the 2nd respondent;

ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order directing the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the application for building permit submitted by the petitioner de hors the Master Plan and the Kovilakam DTP Scheme;

iii) Declare that the petitioner is entitled to the deemed building permit as per Section 394 of Kerala Municipality Act and Rule 15 of Kerala Municipality Building Rules;

iv) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order directing the respondents 1 and 2 to issue building permit to the petitioner forthwith;

v) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order directing the 3rd respondent to consider Exhibit P4 application submitted by the petitioner within such time as this Hon'ble Court deem just and proper;

vi) Dispense with the translation of documents in vernacular language;

vii) Pass such other orders as this Hon’ble Court shall deem just.” [sic]

2. The main prayer in this writ petition is against Ext.P3 communication issued by the 2nd respondent by which the Corporation noted certain defects for processing the building permit application. The defect No.1 is regarding the nature of the land, which is shown as 'nilam'. The petitioner submitted a Form-6 application. When this writ petition came up for consideration before this Court on

30.10.2025, this Court passed the following order :

“The 3rd respondent will consider Exhibit P4 Form 6 application after getting necessary report from the Village Officer, within two months.

Post on 07.01.2026.”

3. Now, the learned Government Pleader submitted that the Form-6 application is already allowed as per order dated 28.01.2026. If that is the case, the petitioner can produce a copy of the same before the Corporation and if the other defects noted in Ext.P3 are also cured, the Corporation will process the building permit application in accordance with law, forthwith. If the defects are cured, the Corporation will process the building permit application within 30 days from the date on which the defects are cured.

With the above observation, this writ petition is disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top