jump to navigation

Legal Action


Our Legal Advisors:

Adv M.I.Alexander Panicker

Adv Boris Paul

Adv G. Vijayakumar

Adv Raja Vijayaraghavan (High Court of Kerala)


A Copy of the Legal Notice issued by Adv Boris Paul on behalf of the Samithy is published here:

09-10-2009

To

1) Sri Hanock,

S/o Philip,

Kanakam Vila,

Pullichira P.O.,

Kollam – 691 304.

2) Sri Antony,

S/o Pathrose,

Sunita Sadan,

Pullichira P.O.,

Kollam – 691 304.

3) Sri Jenanto,

S/o Vincent,

Jam Jim Jom Bhavan,

Kottiyam P.O.,

Kollam – 691 571.

4) John,

S/o Alphonso,

Shalom,

Kottiyam P.O.,

Kollam – 691 571.

5) Fr Lazar S.Pattakadavu,

Parish Priest,

Immaculate Conception Church,

(Amalolbhava Matha Devalayam),

Pullichira P.O.,

Kollam – 691 304.

Sirs,

Under instructions from my clients, 1) Mr Selestine Dismas, Vazhavila Thekkethil, Pullichira P.O., Kollam – 691 304; 2) Mr Victor A., Vilayil Kizhakkathil, Pullichira P.O., Kollam – 691 304; 3) Mr S.Augustin, Eden, Pullichira P.O., Kollam – 691 304; 4) Mr Maryson N.S., Swagat, Pullichira P.O., Kollam – 691 304; and 5) Mr Dasan Lazar, Praveena House, Pullichira P.O., Kollam – 691 304 I hereby issue this legal notice to you as follows:

My clients are members of Pullichira Parish of Kollam Diocese and also active members of Pullichira Edavaka Samrakshana Samithy which is a Society lawfully registered and functioning at Pullichira with several aims for the welfare and social upliftment of the members of Pullichira Parish. My clients are persons with high integrity and having obedience to law of the land. My clients are having a good reputation and respectability among the public and are social activists with a good motive. My clients as members of the Pullichira Edavaka Samrakshana Samithy intervene in matters of Parishioner’s interests and for preserving the valuable assets of the Parish in a lawful manner.

On 03-08-2009, 1 to 4 among you had filed a Petition/Complaint before the District Registrar, Kollam against my clients and others praying for cancelling the Registration granted to “Pullichira Edavaka Samrakshana Samithy”. The said Petition contained false and highly defamatory statements against my clients. The averments therein include wild, baseless and highly defamatory statements to the extent that my clients had “forged” a Memorandum and presented it to the Registering Authority and “misrepresented” and “mislead” her to grant an “illegal” Registration to the Society. The statement in Paragraph 4 of the said Petition, “എന്നാല്‍ ടി എതിര്‍കക്ഷികള്‍ മേല്‍ വസ്തുതകള്‍ എല്ലാം ബോധപൂര്‍വം മറച്ചു വെച്ച് രജിസ്ട്രേഷന്‍ അതോറിട്ടി മുമ്പാകെ ഇടവക സ്വത്തുകള്‍ ഭരിക്കുന്നതിനും, സൂക്ഷിക്കുന്നതിനും ഉള്ള വ്യാജേന forged ആയ ഒരു മെമോരാണ്ടം ഹാജരാക്കി രജിസ്ട്രേഷന്‍ അതോറിറ്റിയെ misrepresent ചെയ്തും mislead ചെയ്തും അന്യായമായി ക്യു.308/09 നമ്പരായി കത്തോലിക്കാ സഭയിലെ പുല്ലിച്ചിറ ഇടവകയുടെ കാര്യങ്ങളില്‍ ഇടപെടുന്നതിനുവേണ്ടി ഒരു സംഘം നിയമവിരുദ്ധമായി രജിസ്ട്രേഷന്‍ നടത്തിയിട്ടുള്ളതും അപ്രകാരം ഒരു രജിസ്ട്രേഷന്‍ നടന്നത്……” is utterly false and highly defamatory. The statement in Paragraph 7 of the said Petition, “അന്യായമായി സംഘം ചേര്‍ന്ന് കത്തോലിക്കരുടെ ആരാധന സ്ഥലവും തെക്കന്‍ കേരളത്തിലെ പ്രസിദ്ധ മരിയന്‍ തീര്‍ഥാടന കേന്ദ്രമായ പുല്ലിച്ചിറ അമലോല്‍ഭവ മാതാ ദേവാലയത്തിലെ ആത്മീയ പ്രവര്‍ത്തനങ്ങളെയും പള്ളിയിലെ നവീകരണ പ്രവര്‍ത്തനത്തെയും തടസ്സപെടുത്തി പ്രദേശത്ത് ക്രമസമാധാന നില തകര്‍ക്കാന്‍ ശ്രമിച്ച സാമൂഹ്യവിരുധര്ക്കെതിരെ ടി ഇടവകയിലെ ഭരണാധികാരികള്‍ പോലീസില്‍ പരാതിപെട്ടിട്ടുള്ളതാണ്. ആയതിനെ പരാജയപെടുത്തനമെന്നുള്ള ഉധ്ധേശത്തോട്‌ കൂടി ഉത്തമ കത്തോലിക്കാ വിശ്വാസികളല്ലാത്ത കുറച്ചു പേര്‍ ചേര്‍ന്ന് അന്യായമായതും അക്രമപരവുമായ കാര്യങ്ങള്‍ നടത്തി ടി religious institutionന്‍റെ നടത്തിപ്പിനെ തടസ്സപെടുത്തനമെന്നുള്ള ഉധ്ധേശത്തോട്‌ കൂടി “പുല്ലിച്ചിറ ഇടവക സംരക്ഷണ സമിതി” എന്ന നാമധേയത്തില്‍ അന്യായമായ ലക്ഷ്യങ്ങള്‍ എഴുതിച്ചേര്‍ത്ത് മെമോരാണ്ടം തയ്യാറാക്കി കൃത്രിമ വ്യവഹാരങ്ങള്‍ ബോധിപ്പിക്കുന്നതിനും ഇടവകയില്‍ സമാധാനം ഇല്ലാതാക്കുന്നതിനും വേണ്ടി രജിസ്ട്രേഷന്‍ ഹാജരാക്കിയിട്ടുള്ളതുമാണ്.” is also utterly false and highly defamatory. The statement in Paragraph 9 of the said Petition, “അന്യായമായ ലക്ഷ്യങ്ങള്‍ സാധ്യമാക്കുന്നതിന് വേണ്ടി ‘forged’ ആയ ഒരു മെമോരണ്ടം തയ്യാറാക്കി രെജിസ്ട്രാര്‍ മുമ്പാകെ ഹാജരാകി രജിസ്ടരിംഗ് അതോറിറ്റിയെ തെറ്റിദ്ധരിപ്പിച്ചും കബളിപ്പിച്ചും രേജിസ്ട്രഷന്‍ സംബാധിചിട്ടുള്ളതും അതിന്റെ മറവില്‍ ടിയാന്മാരുടെ വ്യക്തിപരമായ നിയമവിരുദ്ധ പ്രവര്‍ത്തികള്‍ ‘സംഘത്തിന്റെ ലേബെലിലാക്കാന്‍’ ശ്രമിച്ചുവരുന്നതുമാണ്.” is utterly false and highly defamatory. Such statements are imputed upon my clients with a purposeful intention of defaming my clients before the members of Pullichira Parish as well as the public and various Government Officials. Moreover your malafide intentions have been further revealed from the fact that you are giving wide publicity to the aforesaid Petition containing such defamatory statements, among the public and especially among the members of Pullichira Parish. Several persons residing in and around Pullichira have received the copy of the said Petition by Post and my clients have reasons to believe that it is only your handiwork to publicise the defamatory statements contained in the said Petition. It is also widely circulated by you all in person. The 5th among you is circulating a large number of copies of the said Petition to the Parishioners who visit him for religious purposes.

Eventhough the 5th among you is not a Petitioner in the said Petition, it was evident that the 5th among you is the brain behind the said Petition. The cat came out of the bag when Caveat Petitions filed by all of you jointly before the Courts at Kollam against my clients on 26-09-2009. In the Caveat Petitions filed jointly by all of you it is clearly and specifically stated that the “Petitioners have already filed a complaint before the District Registrar, Kollam for the cancellation of the illegal registration of the Society.” So it is proved beyond doubt that the 5th among you is also an active partner with the others among you in making such defamatory statements in the Petition filed before the District Registrar. Moreover, on 28-07-2009, a copy of the Legal Notice issued to 1 to 4 among you was sent to the 5th among you with a footnote “For information and necessary action against the above four addressees for spreading word that their defamatory statements have the approval of the Parish Priest of Pullichira Parish.” The 5th among you had received the copy of the legal notice on 29-07-2009 but did not even care to respond. The fact that contents of the said footnote was not denied by the 5th among you and that no action was taken against 1 to 4 among you is sufficient proof that all of you are hands in glove in making and publicising the above said defamatory statements against my clients.

Due to the false and defamatory statements cast upon my clients by you as aforesaid, the reputation and dignity of my clients have eroded among the public and especially among the members of Pullichira Parish. Many of the relatives and friends of my clients tend to believe such defamatory statements as 1 to 4 among you have also spread word that you have made such statements at the behest of the present Parish Priest, the 5th among you. The ordinary members of Parish who repose faith in Priests tend to believe such false statements when it is being publicised and affirmed that such statements are approved by the Parish Priest. You have malafide publicised such false defamatory statements against my client and further aggravated the situation by claiming that such statements were true and that it had the approval of the present Parish Priest of Pullichira Parish.

The defamatory statements made by you against my clients have caused immense mental agony to my clients as several friends and relatives have tend to believe that my clients are criminals who commit forgery, irreligious and persons who are disobedient to the Church procedures. The acts committed by you constitute criminal offences punishable under the Indian Penal Code. You are also liable to compensate my clients for the immense mental agony suffered by them due to your defamatory statements as aforesaid. The loss of reputation and the mental agony sustained to my clients is incalculable in terms of money for the purpose of compensation. My clients are limiting their claim to a token amount of Rupees One Lakh only which is reasonable.

My clients intend to set the law in motion for redressal of their grievances. If you are interested in avoiding legal proceedings against you in the aforesaid matter, you are hereby called upon to publish a public notice tendering unconditional apologies to my clients and issue signed copies of the same to my clients alongwith a compensation of Rupees One Lakh and this notice charges of Rupees One thousand within fifteen days of receipt of this notice. Any failure shall attract necessary legal proceedings against you, both criminal and civil, and you will be liable for all the costs and consequences thereof.

Advocate Boris Paul

*********************************************************************************************************



Petition submitted before Kollam District Collector on 5th November

Before the District Collector, Kollam

Petition No:                 of 2009

Petitioner:

S.Augustine,

Secretary,

Pullichira Edavaka Samrakshana Samithy ( Reg No: Q 308/2009)

Eden,

Pullichira P.O., Kollam – 691 304.

Respondents:

1)   The Secretary,

Mayyanad Grama Panchayat,

Mayyanad P.O., Kollam.

2)   The Dy Director of Panchayats,

Civil Station, Kollam.

3)   Fr Lazar S.Pattakadavu,

Parish Priest,

Immaculate Consuption Church,

Pullichira P.O., Kollam – 691 304.

PETITION MOST RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER

1. The Petitioner is the Secretary of “Pullichira Edavaka Samrakshana Samithy” a registered Association having Registration No: Q 308/2009.

2. This Petition is filed to bring to notice a very serious complaint regarding blatant violation of “Kerala Municipality Building Rules” (KMBR) and Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) norms by the Respondents by approving a Plan submitted by the 3rd Respondent before the 1st Respondent for construction of Buildings.

3. The application and submission of the Plan was made by the 3rd Respondent in a secret manner without information and knowledge of the members of the Parish/Church. He has no authority to submit such a Plan for approval. This was done so as the 1st Respondent and 3rd Respondent have knowledge that the said Plan was in total violation of KMBR and CRZ.

4. The proposed plan discloses construction in a Plot comprised in Resurvey No: 504/10 of Mayyanad Village. The Plan further discloses construction of Buildings for a “Religious Shop” and “Canteen” for Immaculate Consuption Church, Pullichira. If so, as per Rule 55 of Kerala Municipality Building Rules, the Secretary of Mayyanad Grama Panchayat is not having any authority or power to approve the plan and issue Building Permit. It is the Town Planner who is authorised to approve the plan and grant sanction as per Rule 55 of KMBR. The Secretary, 1st Respondent herein has blatantly violated this Rule and has without any authority, approved the illegal Plan and issued Building Permit.

5. The proposed construction is in violation of Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) Notification as it is within the Coastal Regulation Zone. This aspect is not at all considered by the Secretary of Mayyanad Grama Panchayat.

6. On 30-10-2009 we had submitted a written Complaint to the Deputy Director of Panchayats, Kollam (File No: 11426) regarding the abovesaid violation. Till date the 2nd Respondent has not taken any action on the Complaint. This inaction reveals that the Respondents are hands in glove to make unlawful and unauthorised construction under the guise of an illegal Building Permit and Plan.

7. The unauthorised and illegal acts of the respondents are detrimental to the interests of the members of the Parish, the public at large, and are also against the Rules and Notifications which are to be complied by the Respondents.

8. The 3rd Respondent has taken hasty steps to start the illegal and unauthorised construction as he is aware that the authorities might stop the illegality at any moment. His intention is to complete the construction hastily and thereafter to obstruct any legal proceedings for its demolition under the cover of religion. If he is permitted to accomplish this task, it will create unnecessary religious tension in the area as well as law and order problems.

Therefore it is humbly prayed that this Honourable Authority may be pleased to stay the unauthorised construction proposed by the 3rd Respondent and quash all the proceedings related to the approval of the Plan and issuance of Building Permit to the 3rd Respondent by the 1st Respondent.

Dated this the 5th day of November 2009

Signed/-

Petitioner – S. Augustine,

Secretary,

Pullichira Edavaka Samrakshana Samithy

(Reg No: Q 308/2009)

==================================================================================

Copy of Plaint filed before Munsiff Court, Kollam as O.S No: 926/2009

Before the Munsiff’s Court, Kollam

O.S No:  926  of 2009

Pullichira Edavaka Samrakshana Samithy                  :                       Plaintiff

Parish Priest, Immaculate Conception Church etc                  :                       Defendants

PLAINT FILED UNDER ORDER VII RULE 1 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

Pullichira Edavaka Samrakshana Samithy,

Reg No: Q 308/2009,

Pullichira, Kollam – 691 304.

Represented by its Secretary,                                      :           Plaintiff

S.Augustine, aged 62 years,

S/o Sebastian,

Eden, Pullichira,

Kollam

All notices, processes etc to the Plaintiffs may be served on the above address or on their Counsels, M/s Boris Paul & G.Vijayakumar Advocates, Ashtamudi Law Chambers, Kollam -9.

1.  Parish Priest,

Immaculate Conception Church,

Pullichira,

Kollam – 691 304.

2. Fr Lazar S.Pattakadavu,                                         :           Defendants

Parish Priest,

Immaculate Conception Church,

Pullichira,

Kollam – 691 304.

The address for service of notices, summons, processes etc to the defendants are as stated above.

The Plaintiff submits as follows:

  1. The Plaintiff, “Pullichira Edavaka Samrakshana Samithy”, is a society registered under the Travancore Cochin Literary Scientific and Charitable Societies Act 1955 with Registration No. Q 308 /2009. As per the byelaw of the said Society the Secretary is competent to represent the Society. The said society was formed and registered with the avowed object of safeguarding the welfare of the people living within the limits of Pullichira Parish, protecting the assets of the parish, for uplifting the people in the economic and social welfare front, amelioration of the social evils ailing the society and to take up their cause before courts of law, to protect the interest of downtrodden, for imparting legal knowledge etc.
  2. The 1st Defendant is the Parish Priest of Immaculate Conception Church in the form of a public trust coming within Kollam Diocese of Roman Catholic Church. There are thousands of parishioners who are members and beneficiaries of the said Church. There is Canon Law and other byelaw for the administration of the parish church and its assets. The Parish Priest is having the legal status of Trustee and is entrusted with the assets and income of the Parish. The 2nd defendant is the present Parish Priest who is impleaded in this suit on his individual capacity to make him liable for the illegal mismanagement and misappropriation of Trust fund and its assets.
  3. The 2nd Defendant a Priest with in the Kollam Diocese unpopular in the Diocese for his autocratic way of administration and corruptive practices was appointed as the Parish Priest of Immaculate Conception Church by the Diocesan Bishop of Kollam. The Parishioners started experiencing his way of administration by dividing the Parishioners. Anti social and corruptive persons were unduly influenced by the 2nd Defendant and with their support he charted out plans and programmes to siphon out fund of the church. The Immaculate Conception Church famous in the locality as a pilgrim centre has huge income and bank balance.
  4. The 2nd Defendant in order to misappropriate funds is very much fond of construction works. Without sanction of General Body of the Church, he had undertaken many projects. One construction made as ‘Vishudhapatha’, a ramp like pathway to the western backwater shore as per statement of accounts reached 23 lakhs. Any layman on seeing such work won’t estimate cost above 5 lakhs. This sort of looting in the trust fund and the unholy alliance with antisocial people and autocratic style of functioning caused few Parishioners to unite and protest against the 2nd Defendant’s acts. Since the 2nd Defendant started threat and harassment and also to incriminate protestors with the help of his brother, who is in the Police Department, they resolved to register their association and hence Society was registered.
  5. The 2nd defendant out of his evil desire to do further construction unnecessarily in the church premises had prepared a plan for construction of a Canteen and Store and without sanction of General body of the Church had submitted to the Secretary of the Mayyanad Grama Panchayat and on his undue influence got it approved illegally. The proposed construction was against the Coastal Regulation Zone limit and also Rule 55 of Kerala Building Rule was applicable.
  6. The Plaintiff had on 05-11-2009 submitted complaints before various authorities under the Local Self Government Department of the Government as well as before the Minister regarding an unlawful construction being started by the Defendants in the Plaint Scheduled property violating the Kerala Municipal Building Rules and the Coastal Regulation Zone Notification. The Plaint Scheduled property is owned by the Immaculate Conception Church of Pullichira. The defendants have started the construction by illegally obtaining a Building Permit from the Mayyanad Grama Panchayat Secretary in gross violation of Rule 55 and Rule 23(4) of KMBR.
  7. On 30-11-2009 the Plaintiff had filed an Appeal No: 982/2009 before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, Thiruvananthapuram to set aside the impugned Building Permit issued by Mayyanad Grama Panchayat. The Appeal is taken on file and posted for hearing on 21-12-2009.
  8. Meanwhile, on 02-12-2009 the Secretary to Government, Local Self Government Department Government of Kerala had passed an Order No: 67618/RA3/09/LSGD directing the Mayyanad Grama Panchayat Secretary to take steps to stop the construction activities immediately as a prima facie case of violation of KMBR was found in enquiry. Even though the Order was communicated to the Secretary, he has not taken any steps to stop the unlawful construction being carried out in violation of KMBR. This is solely due to political interference and undue influence wield by the Defendants. The unlawful construction is being carried out by the Defendants by engaging several workers day and night. The Plaintiff submitted complaints through Telegram, Fax, SMS and in writing to all concerned authorities. No action is taken to stop the unlawful construction despite a ban in writing by the Government Secretary. Now the Plaintiff has no alternative other than to approach this Honourable Court for a decree of Injunction. If the unlawful construction violating KMBR and Coastal Regulation Zone is permitted to be continued, it will be illegal and abuse of power and authority. It will cause irreparable loss and injury to the public and members of Pullichira Parish of Kollam Diocese.
  9. The 2nd Defendant has obtained the Building Permit without any authority as he has not produced the resolution of the General Body of the Parish members and approval and consent of the Diocesan Bishop. The Plaint Scheduled property is not personally owned by the Defendants and therefore these requirements are highly necessary. The Plaint Scheduled property was the only space used as a Playground by the students of a Lower Primary School run adjacent to it by the Church.

10.  The plaint schedule property is a portion of the same premises of the Immaculate Conception Church and is lying contiguous with the remaining Church properties. For the said premises any construction must come with in the definition of Assembly Occupancy. There are special Rules applicable to Assembly Occupancy. In order to avoid such restrictions in the premises, the defendants had mentioned the proposed building site as a separate and independent property and produced only title deed of such a property. Whereas it is for common purpose of Church and Assembly such constructions are made.

11.   The proposed building is hardly 65 ft east of Itthikara river high tide shore. 100m is the minimum distance to be left for any such construction as per the costal Regulation zone notification. The said area would come under CRZ III category.

12.  In order to defeat objections and complaints raised by the Plaintiff, the defendants may be out of church fund or by the Panchayat, any how under conspiracy and collusion had urgently put concrete on 29-11-2009 through the southern side of proposed building site to make it appear that there is a 2 m wide pathway in between church premises and the proposed building site. The said concrete work is also turned towards north to make it appear there is a pathway towards north to overcome CRZ restriction. In the approved plan it was fraudulently shown that there is a pathway on the southern side having width of 4 m. Any construction in violation of CRZ Notification is illegal and void.

13.   Even though the Government had stayed construction of the building, the act of the Defendants to continue construction is nothing but abuse of money power and influence and is mocking the authority of State and is an open challenge to Rule of Law. Any citizen can question and challenge any construction made in violation of Building Rule. The construction is being carried out in haste so as to occupy it and thereafter to create a law and order problem to the Government to obstruct any legal action citing religious feelings. It is with this ulterior motive that the 2nd Defendant has engaged large number of workers and doing the construction activities day and night.

14.  The Plaintiff has no other means than to approach this Hon Court to enforce the order of the State and also to restrain the defendants from doing illegal construction. Since the Panchayat authorities, Police, Town Planners are taking stand not to stop the illegal construction, this court has to pass urgent and immediate action against the defendants’ illegal construction.

15.  The Plaintiff had approached the Tribunal for LSGI to cancel the permit issued to the 1st defendant and that appeal has nothing to do with the cause of action for this suit. In this suit the plaintiff challenge the right of Defendants to construct such a building in the plaint schedule property.

16.   The cause of action for this Suit arose on 5-11-2009, the date on which the Plaintiff submitted complaints before the Government etc regarding unlawful construction being started by the Defendants, and on 30-11-2009 when a Statutory Appeal was filed before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions for setting aside the impugned Building Permit, and on 2-12-2009, the date on which the Government Secretary directed immediate stoppage of construction in the Plaint Scheduled property and on subsequent days when the Defendants are adamant and continuing the unlawful construction defying the Order of the Government at Mayyanad Village which is within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court.

17.  The Suit is valued at Rs.500/- for a decree of permanent injunction and a Court Fee of Rs.20/- is remitted herewith under Section 27(C) of the Kerala Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act.

Therefore it is humbly prayed that this Honourable Court may be pleased to pass a decree;

a)      Restraining the defendants and their men from continuing with the construction activities in the Plaint Scheduled property in violation of Kerala Municipal Building Rules and Coastal Regulation Zone Notification and from using or occupying any portion of the proposed building for any purposes.

b)      Allowing the cost of the Plaintiff to be realized from the defendants and their assets.

c)      Allowing such other relief that this Honourable Court deems fit and proper in the interests of justice.

Dated this the 10th day of December 2009

SCHEDULE OF PROPERTY

District                                    :           Kollam

Sub District                 :           Kottiyam

Taluk                           :           Kollam

Furka                           :           Chathannoor

Village                         :           Mayyanad

Panchayat                    :           Mayyanad

Old Survey No:           :           13331, 13288, 13283, 13287, 13290, 13323, 13325

Block                           :           27

Re Survey No:                        :           504/10, 504/5, 504/6, 504/7, 504/8

Extent                         :           61 Ares 35 sq meter ( cents)

Boundaries

North                           :           Property of Solomon, Augustin, Juliet, Christy.

South                           :           Perungalil Purayidom & Chittiyazhikom Purayidom

West                            :           Property of Kathreena, Suseela, Oluppil Purayidom,

Thunduvila Purayidom.

East                             :           School & Kayal

Description: 61 Ares 35 sq meter of property comprised in Re Survey Numbers 504/10, 504/5, 504/6, 504/7, 504/8  Block 27 (Old Survey No: 13331, 13288, 13283, 13287, 13290, 13323, 13325) of Mayyanad Village.

Plaintiff:          Pullichira Edavaka Samrakshana Samithy

Represented by Secretary, S.Augustin

Advocate Boris Paul

The facts stated above are true and correct to the best of our knowledge, information and belief.

Plaintiff:          Pullichira Edavaka Samrakshana Samithy

Represented by Secretary, S.Augustin

LIST OF DOCUMENTS PRODUCED

Sl No Date To Whom executed By whom executed Description of the documents Point sought to be proved
1 24-06-2009 Plaintiff District Registrar, Kollam Byelaw Plaint claim
2 5-11-2009 Secretary to Government, LSGD Plaintiff Copy of Complaint Plaint claim
3 30-11-2009 Tribunal for Local Self Govt Institutions Plaintiff Copy of Appeal Plaint Claim
4 2-12-2009 Plaintiff Secretary to Government, LSGD Notarised copy of Order Plaint Claim
5 7-12-2009 Secretary, Mayyanad Grama Panchayat Plaintiff Copy of Complaint Plaint Claim
6 8-12-2009 Plaintiff Secretary, Mayyanad Grama Panchayat Receipt of Complaint Plaint Claim
7 Plaintiff Plaintiff Photographs with negative Plaint Claim

Advocate Boris Paul

Comments»

No comments yet — be the first.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: