BINNY ITTY Vs. P. LALITHAMMA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE issue in these writ petitions relate to the grant of occupancy certificate to a housing unit, by name, Crystal Apartments Rajasilpam, within the local limits of Kottayam Municipality.

(2.) W .P. (C) No. 31437/2010 is filed by the Managing Partner of M/s. Crystal Apartment, which is a partnership firm registered under the Indian Partnership Act, 1939, who had undertaken the construction of the apartments. For convenience of discussion, the petitioner in W.P. (C) No. 31437/2010 is hereinafter referred to as, "the builder". In this writ petition, he is challenging Ext. P25 order passed by the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, Thiruvananthapuram, on an appeal filed by the 1st respondent herein. The 1st respondent in this writ petition is hereinafter referred to as, "the previous owner". The builder was the 3rd respondent in the appeal and respondents 2 and 3 were respondents 1 and 2 respectively. The previous owner had filed the appeal before the Tribunal against Ext. P21 order passed by the 2nd respondent, who is the Secretary of the Kottayam Municipality, on Ext. P12 complaint filed by her against the builder. The allegation in Ext. P12 complaint was in respect of a road shown in Ext. P9 site plan, which, according to the builder, was in fact signed and submitted by the previous owner along with her application for building permit. The builder alleges that after detailed enquiry, the 2nd respondent disposed of the complaint by Ext. P21 order stating that the dispute raised by the previous owner was a civil dispute, which has to be decided by a competent civil court. On appeal, the Tribunal set aside Ext. P21 order, allowed the appeal and directed the 2nd respondent to initiate proceedings under Rule 16 of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 1999. The said order is under challenge in this writ petition. W.P. (C) No. 26700/2011 is filed by the previous owner. In the writ petition she alleges as follows;

(3.) W .P. (C) No. 24436/2012 is another writ petition filed by the builder. In that writ petition, he is challenging Ext. P24 order passed by the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, Thiruvananthapuram, on an appeal filed by the previous owner. The builder was the 3rd respondent in the appeal and respondents 2 and 3 herein were respectively respondents 1 and 2 in the appeal. The previous owner filed the appeal against Ext. P21 occupancy certificate issued by the 2nd respondent to the petitioner on completion of apartment, by name, M/s. Crystal Apartments 'Rajasilpam'. The Tribunal set aside Ext. P21 occupancy certificate by quoting the previous order (Ext. P19) and stating that the said order was only stayed and not reversed by this Court. According to the builder, the action of the Tribunal is against judicial propriety, particularly, in lieu of the fact that the issue was under consideration of this Court; and it is not related with any violation, but, regarding a right as evidenced by Ext. P11 complaint.