Saturday, 02, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

V.Mammu vs The Excise Commissioner
2021 Latest Caselaw 16922 Ker

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 16922 Ker
Judgement Date : 12 August, 2021

Kerala High Court
V.Mammu vs The Excise Commissioner on 12 August, 2021
                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
    THURSDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 21ST SRAVANA, 1943
                         WP(C) NO. 8701 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          V.MAMMU
          AGED 68 YEARS
          S/O. AHAMMED KUTTY, EXCEL COTTAGE, PETTA, FEROKE P.O,
          KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673006

          BY ADV R.K.MURALEEDHARAN



RESPONDENT/S:

    1     THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER
          NANADAVANAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033.

    2     THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE,
          O.P. RAMAN ROAD, THADAMBATTUTHAZHAM, KOZHIKODE 673 020.

    3     THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE,
          CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE-673020

    4     K.T. JOSEPH,
          THERSA GARDEN, CHETTIKULAM, ELATHUR P.O, KOZHIKODE
          DISTRICT-673 303

    5     M/S. HOTEL CALICUT GATE,
          REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, THERSA GARDEN,
          CHETTIKULAM, ELATHUR P.O, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 303


OTHER PRESENT:

          SR.GP V.K SUNIL




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
12.08.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.8701/2021                      2

                                   JUDGMENT

Petitioner and his two brothers are the absolute owners of multistored

commercial building in RS No.293/6, 293/7 and 293/7A of Velipram Amsom

of Kozhikode Taluk. 4th respondent entered into a registered lease

agreement with the petitioner and his brother undertaking to take the building

on lease for a period of five years with effect from 1/8/2017 for conducting a

bar attached hotel. He obtained FL3 licence and on the strength of licence,

conducted bar in the hotel. While so, on 8/10/2020, the 4 th respondent issued

a notice informing the petitioner that he was terminating lease agreement with

effect from 31/3/2021 and informed that failure rent may be adjusted against

the rent advance paid. On receipt of Ext.P2, the petitioner issued a reply

notice on behalf of the co-owner informing that suggestion was not agreeable

and that he was received the rent advance as alleged, but, offered to permit

them to run the business for the remaining period. Ext.P3 is the reply which

was received by the 4th respondent. Pursuant to the above, the petitioner

allegedly entered into arrangements with 3rd parties for, letting out the building

to them after the expiry of previous lease.

2. In the meanwhile, the petitioner came to know that the 4 th respondent

was attempting to renew FL-3 licence in the building owned by the petitioner

from 1-4-2021. This would have resulted in huge loss to the petitioner and his

brothers, since they had offered to let out the building to another person.

Accordingly, Ext.P5 notice was issued to the first respondent, informing him

about the entire facts and informing that no extension shall be granted

without informing the petitioner. It seems that subsequently, bar licence was

renewed which according to the petitioner was in violation of the terms of the

lease as well as the nature of the transaction. Petitioner has approached this

court contending that he should have been given a reasonable opportunity of

being heard and Ext.P3 order is contrary to law.

3. Since essential grievance of the petitioner is that ignoring Ext.P5

renewal of bar licence was granted, I feel that interest of justice would be

served, if the third respondent is directed to consider Ext.P5 objection in the

light of the entire arrangements and dispose of Ext.P5 application, after giving

the petitioner an opportunity of being heard, as expeditiously as possible , at

any rate, within ten working days from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

SUNIL THOMAS

Judge

dpk

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8701/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTERED LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE 1ST PETITIONER, HIS BROTHERS AND 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 16.08.2017.

Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 08.10.2020.

Exhibit P3               A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY SENT BY
                         REGISTERED POST ACKNOWLEDGMENT DUE TO THE
                         4TH RESPONDENT DATED 23.11.2020.

Exhibit P4               A TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD.

Exhibit P5               A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED TO THE
                         1ST RESPONDENT BY REGISTERED POST
                         ACKNOWLEDGEMENT WITH COPY TO THE
                         RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3 DATED 08.03.2021.

Exhibit P6               TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT AND THE
                         ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD RECEIVED FROM 2ND
                         RESPONDENT.

                         EXT.P7 : COPY OF THE FL-3 LICENCE RENEWAL
                         CERTIFICATE DATED 31/3/2021.
 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter