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

2015 Supreme(Online)(KER) 44261

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
JOY VARGHESE ALUKKAS – Appellant
Versus
ADAT GRAMA PANCHAYATH    Advocate -SRI K B GANGESH – Respondent
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) 11466/2015



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN

&

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/15TH JYAISHTA, 1937

WP(C).No. 11466 of 2015 (G)

----------------------------

PETITIONER(S) :-

-----------------

JOY VARGHESE ALUKKAS, AGED 59 YEARS

S/O.JOSEPH VARGHESE ALUKKAS, ALUKKAS HOUSE

KURIACHIRA.P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT

REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MONU MOHANAN

AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.MOHANAN NAIR, MANIMALA HOUSE

THAZHAM.P.O, PATHANAMTHITTA VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERY TALUK

PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

BY ADV. SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ

RESPONDENT(S) :-

-------------------

1. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, THRISSUR CITY

THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 001.

2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

PERAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 545.

3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

PERAMANGALAM POLICE STATION

THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 545

4. K.RAJENDRAN, FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,,

AGED 60 YEARS, MAMAKULAM PARAMBIL HOUSE, PRESIDENT

PUZHAKKAL SHASTA TEMPLE, PUZHAKKAL.P.O

PUZHAKKAL VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 553.

5. APPU, FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER

AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, PONNENPALA HOUSE, SECRETARY

PUZHAKKAL SHASTA TEMPLE, PUZHAKKAL.P.O

PUZHAKKAL VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 553.

6. ADAT GRAMA PANCHAYATH, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-580 551

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

7. THE SECRETARY, ADAT GRAMA PANCHAYATH,

THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-580 551.

R5 BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)

R6 & R7 BY ADV. SRI.K.B.GANGESH

R4 BY SRI.K.R.ARUN KRISHNAN

R1 TO R3 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.I.DAVIS

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON

05-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 11466 of 2015 (G)

----------------------------

APPENDIX

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :-

----------------------------

EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT OF THE PROPERTY OF

PETITIONER DATED 20.9.2014 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PUZHAKKAL

VILLAGE.

EXHIBIT P1A: TRUE COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF TAX RECEIPT OF

THE PROPERTY OF PETITIONER DATED 20.9.2014 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE

OFFICER, PUZHAKKAL VILLAGE.

EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE DEED OF THE PETITONER DATED

12.8.2011 REGISTERED AS DOCUMENT NO.2881 OF 2011 OF AYYANTHOLE SUB

REGISTRAR OFFICE, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE

PETITIONER BY PUZHAKKAL VILLAGE OFFICE DATED 10-03-2015.

EXHIBIT P4: THE TRUE COPY OF THE DESCRIPTION OF ROAD ISSUED BY ADAT

GRAMA PANCHAYATH.

EXHIBIT P4A: THE TRUE COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF

DESCRIPTION OF ROAD ISSUED BY ADAT GRAMA PANCHAYATH.

EXHIBIT P5: THRE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITOINER

BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 31.3.2015.

EXHIBIT P6: TRUE COPY OF THE DATA BANK ISSUED BY THE KRISHI BHAVAN,

ADAT GRAMA PANCHAYATH.

EXHIBIT P6(a): TRUE COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P6.

EXHIBIT P7: TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH OF THE TEMPLE PROPERTY ALONG

WITH SKETCH OF ROAD.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :- NIL

--------------------------------

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

ASHOK BHUSHAN, CJ

&

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J

----------------------------------------------

W.P(C).No.11466 of 2015

----------------------------------------------

Dated this the 5th June, 2015

JUDGMENT

Shaffique, J.

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking

Police protection. It is submitted that the petitioner has

purchased certain item of property having an extent of

20.55 Ares in Re.Sy.No.222/14 of Puzhakkal Village.

According to him, he intended to raise the level of the

land for the purpose of agricultural operation and the said

property is not a paddy or wet land.

2. It is submitted that respondents 4 and 5 have

threatened the petitioner that he cannot transport earth

through the road in front of the temple, which is the only

access to the petitioner's property.

3. It is contended by learned counsel f

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