Vinu Koshy Abraham vs Greater Cochin Development Authority (Gcda)

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Dec 01, 2023

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1403621

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/1403621
Court: Kerala Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice Devan Ramachandran
Decided On: Dec 01, 2023
Case Number: WP(C)/36835/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Vinu Koshy Abraham

Respondent

Greater Cochin Development Authority (Gcda)

Excerpt

.....by its secretary, pin - 682020 2 m/s abm towers residents association abm towers, kadavanthara p.o., ernakulam, represented by its secretary, pin - 682020 m.paul varghese santheep ankarath m.m.monaye(k/182/1984) k.v.sanosh(k/144/2012) anjana sugunan(k/003577/2022) p.anirudhan(k/002306/2021) this writ petition (civil) having come up for admission on 01.12.2023, the court on the same day delivered the following:judgmentafter arguing this matter for some time, sri.p.g.jayashankar - learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that his clients seek to withdraw this writ petition; however, praying that this court leave them liberty to approach the competent authority, to ensure that there is “fire access” to their premises within the complex. he explained that this is because, on account of the impugned order, if the construction is made in terms of the directives of the gcda, then there would be no access to the premises for a fire engine, and that this would be cataclysmic in future. taking note of the afore submissions, i allow the petitioners to withdraw this writ petition; however, leaving them full liberty to approach any competent authority - be that the corporation or fire authority, or any other - with respect to any grievance he may have as regards the fire safety requirements of the building, for which purpose, all contentions are left open. sd/- devan ramachandran judge stu

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945 PETITIONERS: 1 VINU KOSHY ABRAHAM, AGED 45 YEARS S/O M. K. ABRAHAM, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT 20 TROPHIS STREET, KALKO, VICTORIA 3064, AUSTRALIA, REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER M. K. ABRAHAM, AGED 75, S/O. KOSHY VARGHESE 10B4, ABM TOWERS, KADAVANTHARA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682020 2 M.K. ABRAHAM, AGED 75 YEARS S/O. M.G. KOSHY, RESIDING AT 10B4, ABM TOWERS, KADAVANTHARA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682020 3 M/S ABM BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED ABM TOWERS, KADAVANTRA, ERNAKULAM - 682 020, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, SRI. M. K. ABRAHAM, AGED 75, S/O. M.G. KOSHY, RESIDING AT 10B4, ABM TOWERS, KADAVANTHARA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682020 P.G.JAYASHANKAR P.K.RESHMA (KALARICKAL) S.RAJEEV (K/001711/2019) SAJANA V.H SHAIJU GEORGE AADERSH R.S. PANICKER NITHIN GEORGE RESPONDENTS: 1 GREATER COCHIN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (GCDA) KADAVANTHARA PO, KOCHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN - 682020 2 M/S ABM TOWERS RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION ABM TOWERS, KADAVANTHARA P.O., ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN - 682020 M.PAUL VARGHESE SANTHEEP ANKARATH M.M.MONAYE(K/182/1984) K.V.SANOSH(K/144/2012) ANJANA SUGUNAN(K/003577/2022) P.ANIRUDHAN(K/002306/2021) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

After arguing this matter for some time, Sri.P.G.Jayashankar - learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that his clients seek to withdraw this writ petition; however, praying that this Court leave them liberty to approach the competent Authority, to ensure that there is “Fire Access” to their premises within the complex. He explained that this is because, on account of the impugned order, if the construction is made in terms of the directives of the GCDA, then there would be no access to the premises for a Fire Engine, and that this would be cataclysmic in future. Taking note of the afore submissions, I allow the petitioners to withdraw this writ petition; however, leaving them full liberty to approach any competent Authority - be that the Corporation or Fire Authority, or any other - with respect to any grievance he may have as regards the fire safety requirements of the building, for which purpose, all contentions are left open. Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE stu

Same Court & Year Kerala Orders · 2023 Same Parties Vinu Koshy Abraham vs Greater Cochin Development Authority (G... Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice Devan Ramachandran