Kerala High Court
Commodore V.Ravindranathan V.S.M ... vs Kasthurba Nagar Residents Welfare ... on 2 April, 2014
Author: P.Bhavadasan
Bench: P.Bhavadasan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2014/9TH ASWINA, 1936
OP(C).No. 1377 of 2014 (O)
---------------------------
O.S.NO.157/2013 OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM
----------------------
PETITIONER:
----------------------
COMMODORE V.RAVINDRANATHAN V.S.M (RETD.),
RESIDING AT H4, KASTHURBA NAGAR, KADAVANTHRA,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 680 020.
BY ADV. SRI.R.PUSHPANGATHAN PILLAI
RESPONDENTS:
------------------------------
1. KASTHURBA NAGAR RESIDENTS WELFARE ASSOCIATION,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, V.S MOHANDAS,
RESIDING AT K17, KASTHURBA NAGAR, KADAVANTHRA,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 680 020.
2. THE GREATER COCHIN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KADAVANTHRA,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 680 020.
3. L.CHANDRAKANTH, AGED 42 YEARS,
S/O N.L.KAMATH, KAVALAPARAMBIL HOUSE,
CHERIYA KADAVANTHRA, KADAVANTHRA P.O.,
KOCHI - 682 020.
4. RAMESH M.L,AGED 35 YEARS,
S/O LAKSHMANAN, K24, KASTHURBA NAGAR,
KADAVANTHRA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682 020.
5. SHAJITHA KUMAR T.R, AGED 38 YEARS,
S/O. RAVINDRANATH, K17(A), SHIVA KRIPA,
KASTHURBA NAGAR, KADAVANTHRA,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682 020.
6. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
ERNAKULAM TOWN SOUTH POLICE STATION,
THEVARA,ERNAKULAM.
R2 BY SMT.RAJANI. K.N., SC,GREATER COCHIN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
BY SRI.C.A.MAJEED
R6 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.REJI JOSEPH
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 01-10-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
sts
OP(C).No. 1377 of 2014 (O)
--------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-------------------------------------
EXHIBIT P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 02.04.2014
EXHIBIT P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT AND INJUNCTION APPLICATION
NO.1107 OF 2013
EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 10.05.2011
EXHIBIT P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.A6/47074/2011 DATED 01.10.2011 BY
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR TO THE RDO
EXHIBIT P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE FAX MESSAGE NO.A6/47074/2011 DATED
15.12.2011
EXHIBIT P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 16.01.2013 IN WP(C) NO.1976
OF 2012 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT
EXHIBIT P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.05.2013 IN IA NO.1107 OF 2013
IN OS NO.157 OF 2013
EXHIBIT P8 : TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT AND PETITION DATED 19.11.2013
EXHIBIT P9 : TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT AND PETITION (IA NO.7984 OF 2013)
EXHIBIT P10 : TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF OBJECTION FILED BY THE
PETITIONER TO IA NO.7984 OF 2013
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO.JUDGE
sts
P.BHAVADASAN, J.
-------------------------------------------------
Original Petition (Civil) No.1377 OF 2014
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 1st day of October, 2014.
J U D G M E N T
Challenge is against Ext.P1 order dated 02.04.2014 whereby the lower court dismissed I.A.No.7440/2013 in O.S.No.157/2013 pending before the Munsiff Court, Ernakulam.
2. The matter relates to the nuisance caused by certain persons to the plaintiff who was residing nearby by playing Badminton in front of the residential building of the plaintiff. An interim injunction was granted as per I.A.No.1107/2013 restraining the members of the 1st defendant Association from playing shuttle in such a way so as to cause nuisance to the plaintiff till disposal of the suit. When that order was blatantly violated, the petitioner approached the court below by filing I.A.No.7440/2013 seeking for a direction to comply with the order in I.A.No.1107/2013 and prevent continuation of nuisance. The court below observed that there was no evidence to establish the claim of nuisance and the petition was dismissed. The O.P.(C) No.1377/2014 2 petitioner has produced Exts.P3, P4 and P5 which, according to the petitioner, are sufficient to show that the complaint of the petitioner is genuine and nuisance is in fact caused to the petitioner.
3. During the course of proceedings, it has come out that the property where nuisance is being created belongs to GCDA. Ext.P3 is a communication issued by the Sub Inspector of Police, Ernakulam to the Secretary, GCDA informing him that a complaint has been received from the petitioner with regard to nuisance and since the property belongs to GCDA, GCDA should be taken such steps as are necessary. More important is Exts.P4 and P5 which are communications issued by the District Collector to the Revenue Divisional Officer as well as to the Assistant Commissioner of Police to take such steps as are necessary to prevent nuisance and disturbance being caused in the locality. To be more precise, in Ext.P5 it is stated that even in the night time, nuisance is caused to the residents of Kasturba Nagar and the District Collector had directed the Assistant Commissioner of Police to take action. It is disappointing to note that no action O.P.(C) No.1377/2014 3 has been taken.
4. In the light of Exts.P3, P4 and P5, the court below was not justified in coming to the conclusion that no nuisance is being caused to the petitioner and his family.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is felt that a reconsideration of the issue is necessary in the light of Exts.P3 to P5.
Therefore, this petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the trial court for fresh consideration in the light of the documents made mention of above.
Sd/-
P.BHAVADASAN JUDGE smp