Property rights allow for the construction of structures where legal ownership is established, despite community objections.

JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with the following prayers:

“i) issue a writ of mandamus or other writ order or direction directing, the 1st and 2nd respondent to afford necessary and effective protection for life and engaging workers and constructing compound wall of the petitioner’s property.

ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or other writ order or direction directing, 1^st and 2^nd respondent to take necessary legal action on Ext. P4 complaint.

iii) to dispense with filing of translation of vernacular documents.

iv) to grant such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem just and proper in the interest of justice.” (SIC)

2. The petitioner is the owner of an immovable property having an extent of 22.26 Ares, situated in Thenjipalam Village, Tirurangadi Taluk in Malappuram District is the submission. According to the petitioner, the property is described as ‘purayidam’ in the revenue records. The said property is not included in the Data Bank is the submission. Ext.P5, Basic Tax Register (BTR) is produced to show that the property is shown as ‘purayidam’.

3. It is submitted that in the first week of April, 2025, the petitioner engaged with some of his workers for constructing compound wall for the property covered under Ext.P1. The same was objected by respondent Nos.4 to 8 stating that the said property is ‘nilam’ and no work will be allowed to be carried out in the said property. According to the petitioner, respondents 4 to 8 are staying about to 100 and 150 meters away from the petitioner’s property and they are not sharing any boundary with the petitioner’s property. Respondent Nos.4, 5 and 6 are brothers and 7 and 8 are the children of the 4^th respondent is the submission. The petitioner contacted the 2^nd respondent and informed about the threat and objection made by respondents 4 to 8. It is the case of the petitioner that the 2^nd respondent came to the spot and warned respondent Nos.4 to 8 not to interfere and object the work from being carried out on convincing himself that the property is not a ‘nilam’ but ‘purayidam’ is the submission. It is submitted that, when the work of the compound wall resumed, the respondents again came to the site and threatened and objected. Hence, this Writ Petition is filed.

4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader and also the counsel appearing for respondent Nos.4 to 8.

5. The counsel for the petitioner reiterated the contentions raised by the petitioner in this writ petition. The Government Pleader submitted that the petitioner’s property is not included in the Data Bank as per the report submitted by the Village Officer.

6. The counsel appearing for respondent Nos.4 to 8 submitted that a counter affidavit is filed by them. The counsel takes me through the counter and the photographs produced along with the counter. It is submitted that it is a paddy land and the construction is not permissible in the property. It is also submitted that, if any construction is made, that will affect the paddy fields in the area. The counsel also submitted that the document by which the petitioner is in possession of the property itself shows that the property is described as ‘nilam’. The counsel also submitted that the official respondents taking steps to change the nature of the property in the Basic Tax Register (BTR) and it is a mistake in the BTR.

7. The counsel for the petitioner takes me through Ext.P1 document by which he obtained the property and submitted that the description of the property is shown as ‘janmam purayidam’.

8. Admittedly, the property of the petitioner is not included in the Data Bank. The petitioner wants to construct a compound wall. There is no dispute to the fact that no permission is necessary for con