Athipparambath Vijayan Vs. the Tahsildar

Athipparambath Vijayan vs The Tahsildar

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Feb 18, 2014

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1128439

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1128439
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice K.T.Sankaran
Decided On: Feb 18, 2014
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Athipparambath Vijayan

Respondent

The Tahsildar

Excerpt

.....buildings (lease and rent control) act (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'). that petition is pending.2. according to the petitioner, he moved ext.p3 application dated 31.10.2013 before the accommodation controller (tahsildar, tirurangadi) under section 17 of the act. ext.p3 application is pending. it is submitted that subsequent to the formation of kondotty taluk, the tahsildar, kondotty, who is the accommodation controller having jurisdiction, has to dispose of ext.p3 application. the relief prayed for in the original petition is to issue a direction to the o.p. (r.c.) no. 15 of2014o ::2. :: accommodation controller having jurisdiction to pass final orders on ext.p3 application.3. in the counter affidavit filed by the third respondent, it is stated that the petitioner and another tenant (jayaprakash) had encroached upon some portions of the property belonging to the panchayat and made unauthorised constructions therein. it is also alleged that the tenant had made material and permanent alterations to the building reducing its value and utility. it is stated that pallikkal grama panchayat issued ext.r3(a) and ext.r3(b) stop memos to the petitioner in respect of certain constructions. it is also contended that the application before the accommodation controller is not maintainable and that it was filed without issuing notice to the landlord.4. ext.p3 application filed by the petitioner is to be disposed of by the accommodation controller having jurisdiction, after hearing both parties. no prejudice would be caused to any of the parties if a direction is issued to the accommodation controller to dispose of the said application expeditiously. o.p. (r.c.) no. 15 of2014o ::3. :: accordingly, the original petition (rc) is disposed of directing the accommodation controller having jurisdiction to dispose of ext.p3 application after affording an opportunity of being heard to both parties, as expeditiously as possible and, at any rate, within a period of three months......

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALAAT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID TUESDAY, THE18H DAY OF FEBRUARY201429TH MAGHA, 1935 OP (RC).No. 15 of 2014 (O) RCP.NO. 25/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE RENT CONTROL COURT,PARAPPANANGADI PETITIONER: ATHIPPARAMBATH VIJAYAN, AGED66YEARS S/O.AYYAPPAN, NEAR KINFRA TECHNOPARK POST CALICUT UNIVERSITY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN (SR.) SRI.PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH SRI.K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR SMT.N.DEEPA SMT.VANDANA MENON RESPONDENTS:

1. THE TAHSILDAR, TIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT (ACCOMMODATION CONTROLLER UNDER THE BUILDINGS (LEASE & RENT CONTROL ) ACT] 2. THE TAHSILDAR, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. [ACCOMMODATION CONTROLLER UNDER THE BUILDINGS (LEASE& RENT CONTROL) ACT] 3. VALIYAVEETTIL RARUKKUTTY,,AGED59YEARS S/O.KELU, TIRURANGADI TALUK, PALLIKKALAMSOM DESOM POST PALLIKKAL. R3 BY ADV. SRI.HARISH R. MENON R3 BY ADV. SRI.K.T.SHYAMKUMAR R1 AND R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.E.M.ABDUL KHADER THIS OP (RENT CONTROL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON182.2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP (RC).No. 15 of 2014 (O) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF RCR NO.25/2013 FILED BY THE3D RESPONDENT DATED2608.2013 BEFORE THE RENT CONTROL COURT, PARAPPANANGADI. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN RCP NO.25/2013 DATED JANUARY, 2014. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE1T RESPONDENT DATED3110.2013. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS EXT.R3(a) TRUE COPY OF THE STOP MEMO ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY OF THE PALLIKKAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT. EXT.R3(b) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER

DATED256.2013 ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY OF PALLIKKAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT TO THE SECRETARY OF THE GANAPATHY TEMPLE COMMITTEE. EXT.R3(c) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE VYAPARI VYAVASAI EKOPANA SAMITHY TO THE TEMPLE COMMITTEE ON166.2013. //TRUE COPY// AHZ/ K.T.SANKARAN & P.UBAID, JJ.

---------------------------------------------------- O.P.(R.C.) NO. 15 OF2014O ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of February, 2014 JUDGMENT

K.T.Sankaran, J.

The petitioner is the tenant of a shop building in Pallikkal Grama Panchayat which belongs to the third respondent. The third respondent has filed R.C.P.No.25 of 2013 before the Rent Control Court, Parappanangadi (Ext.P1), for eviction of the tenant under Section 11(4)(ii) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). That petition is pending.

2. According to the petitioner, he moved Ext.P3 application dated 31.10.2013 before the Accommodation Controller (Tahsildar, Tirurangadi) under Section 17 of the Act. Ext.P3 application is pending. It is submitted that subsequent to the formation of Kondotty Taluk, the Tahsildar, Kondotty, who is the Accommodation Controller having jurisdiction, has to dispose of Ext.P3 application. The relief prayed for in the Original Petition is to issue a direction to the O.P. (R.C.) NO. 15 OF2014O ::

2. :: Accommodation Controller having jurisdiction to pass final orders on Ext.P3 application.

3. In the counter affidavit filed by the third respondent, it is stated that the petitioner and another tenant (Jayaprakash) had encroached upon some portions of the property belonging to the Panchayat and made unauthorised constructions therein. It is also alleged that the tenant had made material and permanent alterations to the building reducing its value and utility. It is stated that Pallikkal Grama Panchayat issued Ext.R3(a) and Ext.R3(b) stop memos to the petitioner in respect of certain constructions. It is also contended that the application before the Accommodation Controller is not maintainable and that it was filed without issuing notice to the landlord.

4. Ext.P3 application filed by the petitioner is to be disposed of by the Accommodation Controller having jurisdiction, after hearing both parties. No prejudice would be caused to any of the parties if a direction is issued to the Accommodation Controller to dispose of the said application expeditiously. O.P. (R.C.) NO. 15 OF2014O ::

3. :: Accordingly, the Original Petition (RC) is disposed of directing the Accommodation Controller having jurisdiction to dispose of Ext.P3 application after affording an opportunity of being heard to both parties, as expeditiously as possible and, at any rate, within a period of three months. If the first respondent finds that the second respondent is the Accommodation Controller having jurisdiction, the files relating to Ext.P3 application shall be made over to the second respondent. If so, the second respondent shall issue notice to the parties and dispose of the matter after affording an opportunity of being heard to both parties. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge (P.UBAID) Judge ahz/

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2014 Same Parties Athipparambath Vijayan vs The Tahsildar Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice K.T.Sankaran