INDUS TOWERS LTD Vs. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Is an unregistered document which is required to be registered under S. 17 of the Registration Act an invalid document for all purposes If not what are the purposes for which such document can be availed of These are the larger issues that arise for consideration in this Writ Petition. Briefly put, the facts of the case is as follows:

(2.) The 4th respondent Panchayat has issued Ext. P6 building permit to the petitioner for the construction of Mobile telecommunication tower in the property owned by the 5th respondent situated in Survey No. 302/4 of Porur Village, Nilambur Taluk, Malappuram District. Ext. P6 is issued after complying with all the legal requirements and after being convinced that construction of tower will not cause any kind of inconvenience to anyone and the site is situated in an unobjectionable place and that there is no legal bar in making the constructions. But, when the petitioner started the construction work of mobile tower based on Ext. P6, on 25/10/2011, the 4th respondent issued Ext. P7 stop memo directing the petitioner to stop the construction of the mobile communication tower and to show cause why the permit (Ext. P6) granted to the petitioner shall not be cancelled. Challenging Ext. P7, the petitioner filed Appeal No. 798/2011 before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, Thiruvananthapuram. The Tribunal by Ext. P8 order set aside the direction in Ext. P7, which directs the petitioner to show cause against the cancellation of the permit. But the Tribunal confirmed the direction in Ext. P7 which directs the petitioner to stop the construction of the tower. The petitioner challenged Ext. P8 before this Court by filing W.P. (C) No. 13461/2012.

(3.) While so, the 4th respondent had issued Ext. P9 communication dated 13.8.2012 to the petitioner permitting the petitioner to proceed with the construction of the mobile telecommunication tower. Thus, there is no bar to proceed with the construction of the tower.