AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
A.Muhamed Mustaque, J
This Original Petition was filed in the year 1999, challenging the quarrying permits given to the party respondents herein (respondents 4 and 5).
According to the original petitioner - M/s.Tata Tea Limited, quarrying permits were obtained suppressing the material facts in regard to the interest and title of the property. The petitioner claims title to the said property.
It is averred in the Original Petition itself that a suit for injunction was filed as O.S.No.141/1998. In this Original Petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:
“i) call for the records relating to Exhibits P11, P12, P16(a) to P16(m) and P17 and quash the same by issue of a writ of certiorari OR such other writ, direction or order, as may be deemed fit;
ii) to restrain the respondents 1 to 3 from issuing any further quarrying permits to the 4th and 5th respondents and with respect to the property in Survey No.28/1-1 comprised in the petitioner’s Chundavurrai Estate.
iii) To issue an interim and ad interim relief in terms of prayer (ii) above.
iv) such other reliefs as this Court may be pleased to grant.”
When this matter came up for hearing on the last occasion, this Court directed the Munsiff’s Court, Devikulam, where the injunction suit was pending, to report about the present status. The report is on board. As per the report, the injunction suit was dismissed, and the Appeal thereon has also been dismissed.
The learned counsel for the original petitioner submits that a title suit has been instituted as O.S.No.38/2019 before the Sub Court, Devikulam, and the same is pending.
Apparently, the original petitioner approached this Court claiming title and interest over the property, upon which the quarrying permits have been given by the Statutory Authority in favour of the party respondents. This issue cannot be decided without resolving the question regarding their title and interest over the property in question.
In view of the fact that the original petitioner had only instituted a suit before the Civil Court, it is appropriate for them to approach the said Court for any other relief. There is no doubt that, in the event the Civil Court finds title or interest in favour of the original petitioner, they are free to approach this Court to cancel the quarrying permits etc., given to the party respondents.
Needless to say, the petitioner is at liberty to move the Civil Court for any interim relief against the party respondents as against quarrying.
With liberty as above, this Original Petition is dismissed.