High CourtsDivision Bench(2026) 02 KL CK 2910

Apartment Owners Apex Association (Kerala) & Anr. vs State Of Kerala & Ors.

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 4 February 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Soumen Sen, C.J · Syam Kumar V.M., J
CASE NUMBER
WP(C) NO. 42279 OF 2024

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 268 words

Soumen Sen, C.J.

The grievance of the Petitioner appears to be that, by bypassing the provisions of the Kerala Apartment Ownership Act, 1983 registrations are being permitted under the Travancore-Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act, 1955.

2.

The 1st Petitioner claims to represent Apartment Owners’ Apex Association (Kerala). We fail to appreciate how the said Association can be considered to be a person aggrieved, when there are instances where societies similarly placed as that of the Petitioners have been granted registration under the Travancore-Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act, 1955. The Petitioners can bring it to the notice of the Authorities concerned.

3.

At this stage, it is not possible for us to decide that the Societies which have already been registered under the said Act have not fulfilled the requirements under the relevant Statute before any such registrations were granted to such Societies. If the 1st Petitioner is entitled to similar benefits, nothing has been shown to indicate that the 1st Petitioner has made any such application or claimed those benefits. Moreover, the persons who are likely to be affected by any adverse order may be passed in this proceeding are not before us. On such ground, we are not inclined to entertain this Public Interest Litigation.

4.

Since we are of the view that the petitioner cannot be termed as a person aggrieved and has no locus standi to file a Public Interest Litigation presently comprised in the said petition, which appears to be private in nature, we do not find any merits in the petition. Hence, the Writ Petition stands dismissed.