SUNDER RAJ Vs. CORPORATION OF COCHIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, tenant in building No. XL-4621 in the Cochin Corporation, has filed this Original Petition challenging Ext. P1 proceedings of the first respondent Secretary, Corporation of Cochin. Ext. P1 is addressed to Shri. Joppu Jose, who is the 3rd respondent herein. A copy of Ext. P1 had been endorsed to the petitioner.

(2.) BY Ext. P1, the Corporation had informed the landlord Shri. Joppu Jose that the building in question situated near the Market Road, Ernakulam is in a dilapidated condition because of passage of time and pose a threat to pedestrians and nearby establishments. He had been directed that he should either demolish the building or appropriately strengthen it. He had been advised that compliance should be reported within thirty days of the date of the order, namely, 26. 7. 2000 and he had been warned that if he did not comply with the order, the Corporation will take steps to demolish the building under S. 411 (1) and 411 (3) of the Kerala Municipalities Act.

(3.) THE documents that have forthcome include the report of the Building Inspector, produced as Ext. R1 along with the counter affidavit of the first respondent. Ext. R1 shows that on the request of the third respondent the Building Inspector had inspected the premises on 11. 7. 2000. THE report indicated that the building which had a measurement of 70 Sq. ft. was about 60 years old. THE strength of the building, according to the Building Inspector, was unsatisfactory and he had referred to a situation that there were cracks on the wall and the ceiling slab and the walls were almost disjoined. It was also submitted by him in the report that the building was very close to the road and it may fall at any time. For the safety of the pedestrians as also of the tenants the building was advised to be demolished.