Biju B.L vs Thapovan Heritage Homes Pvt. Ltd
2021 Latest Caselaw 14086 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
   WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 2021/16TH ASHADHA, 1943
                     WP(C) NO. 34179 OF 2019


PETITIONERS:

         BIJU B.L., S/O.BHASI,
         AGED 48 YEARS, BINDU NIVAS,
         PANANGODE, VENGANOOR P.O.,
         THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 523.

         BY ADV J.G.SYAMNATH


RESPONDENTS:

    1    THAPOVAN HERITAGE HOMES PVT. LTD.,
         NELLIKUNNU, MULLOOR P.O.,
         THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 521,
         REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

    2    ANDREAS KURT WILHELM HEITMANN,
         MANAGING DIRECTOR,
         THAPOVAN HERITAGE HOMES PVT. LTD.,
         NELLIKUNNU, MULLOOR P.O.,
         THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695 521.

    3    MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
         VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033,
         REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

    4    THE COMMISSIONER OF FOOD SAFETY,
         FOOD SAFETY COMMISSIONERATE,
         THYCADU P.O.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004.

    5    STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD,
         PLAMOODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004.

    6    DIRECTOR OF INDIAN SYSTEM OF MEDICINE,
         AROGYA BHAVAN, AYURVEDA COLLEGE,
         THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

    7    DEPARTMENT OF FIRE AND RESCUE SERVICES,
         THAMPANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
 WP(C) No.34179/2019

                             2



    8      THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
           VIZHINJAM POLICE STATION,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 521.

           BY ADVS.
           R1-R2 SRI.V.G.ARUN (K/795/2004)
           R1-R2 SRI.NEERAJ NARAYAN
           R3 SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON (SR.),SC
           R3 SRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR,SC
           GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MANU RAJ

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP   FOR
ADMISSION ON 07.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.34179/2019

                                3




                           JUDGMENT

Dated this the 7th day of July, 2021

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking to

direct the respondents 3 to 7 to forthwith issue a stop memo

to the 1st respondent-Company which is running a Heritage

Resort. The allegation of the petitioner is that the 1 st

respondent is running the resort without obtaining statutory

licences from competent authorities. This include D&O

licence, licence from Fire and Safety Department, licence

from Indian System of Medicine, statutory clearance from

Pollution Control Board and licence under FSSAI Act.

2. The learned counsel representing the

respondents 1 and 2 entered appearance and filed a

counter affidavit in the writ petition. The respondents 1 and

2 denied all material averments made in the writ petition by

the petitioner. The respondents 1 and 2 submitted that WP(C) No.34179/2019

proceedings are pending before this Court and various

statutory authorities, relating statutory licences required for

running the resort. The learned counsel for the

respondents 1 and 2 further submitted that the resort is not

functioning as on date and the respondents 1 and 2 do not

intend to resume the operation of the resort without

obtaining all licences and clearances from statutory

authorities or by positive orders from this Court. The

learned counsel for the respondents 1 and 2 further alleged

that the intention of the petitioner behind filing this writ

petition, is to take possession of the resort buildings under

the guise of orders of this Court and that may not be

permitted.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner on the

other hand submitted that the petitioner does not propose to

and will not claim the possession of the resort buildings

except in accordance with law and that he is only interested WP(C) No.34179/2019

in ensuring that the resort is being run after availing all

requisite statutory licences.

4. In view of the submissions made by the learned

counsel for the respondents 1 and 2 and the undertaking

given by the learned counsel for the petitioner, no

adjudicatory orders are required in this writ petition. This

writ petition is therefore disposed of recording the

submission made by the learned counsel for the

respondents 1 and 2 that the functioning of the resort will

not be resumed without obtaining necessary licences or

positive orders from this Court. Similarly, the submission

made on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner will not

forcibly take possession of the resort properties from the 2 nd

respondent, is also recorded.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH JUDGE ncd/07.07.2021 WP(C) No.34179/2019

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 34179/2019

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 02.08.2018 OF THE 8TH RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT R2(a) A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 08/03/2016 IN APPEAL NO.491/2014 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTION.

EXHIBIT R2(b) A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 09/10/2017 & 20/10/2017 IN WPC.NO.32165/2017.

EXHIBIT R2(c)         A TRUE PHOTOCOPY    OF THE INTERIM
                      ORDERS     DATED    20/03/2018  IN
                      WPC.NO.5830/2018.

EXHIBIT R2(d)         A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF AGREEMENT DATED
                      11/01/2017   ENTERED    BETWEEN    THE
                      PETITIONER AND THE 2ND RESPONDENT.