Neetha B Raj vs Kochi Municipal Corporation
2021 Latest Caselaw 22658 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
    FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 28TH KARTHIKA, 1943
                        WP(C) NO. 25011 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          NEETHA B RAJ
          AGED 52 YEARS
          W/O.BIJU.S.RAJ, RESIDING AT 'VISHNUS', XXXIX/4825,
          RAVIPURAM, PERUMANOOR DESOM, M.G.ROAD.P.O,
          PIN-682016.
          BY ADVS.
          REJI GEORGE
          BINOY DAVIS

RESPONDENTS:

    1     KOCHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
          KOCHI-682011,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
    2     THE SECRETARY,
          KOCHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, KOCHI-682011.
    3     C.S.RAMESH,
          AGED 63 YEARS
          S/O SANKUNNI VAIDYAR, FLAT NO.5-T, TOWER NO.3,
          D.D.PLATINUM PLANET, NEAR EDASSERY MISSION,
          KATHRIKKADAVU, KOCHI-682017.
          BY ADV ARUN ANTONY
     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
19.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.25011 OF 2021

                                      2



                               JUDGMENT

Dated this the 19th day of November 2021

This Writ Petition is filed seeking the

following reliefs.

(i)To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ , order or direction, commanding the 2nd respondent to dispose of Exhibits P6 and P8 representations submitted by the petitioner after giving her an opportunity of being heard, without any further delay.

(ii)To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 2nd respondent not to issue license to the 3rd respondent or to any other person to conduct business in Door Nos.54/3197 & 54/3197A without the consent of the petitioner.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner and the learned standing counsel appearing for

respondents 1 and 2. In view of the directions being

issued, notice to the 3rd respondent is dispensed with.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits

that Exhibits P6 and P8 representations have been

submitted by the petitioner before the 1 st and 2nd WP(C).No.25011 OF 2021

respondents objecting to grant of licenses to the 3 rd

respondent for the conduct of commercial activity in the

premises owned by the 3rd respondent in the building

wherein the petitioner has a residential apartment. It is

submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that

the apprehension of the petitioner is that the commercial

activity proposed by the 3rd respondent in the premises,

may result in nuisance to the petitioner and, therefore,

the representations submitted by the petitioner is are

liable to be considered in accordance with law, while

considering the applications, if any, for license, submitted

by the 3rd respondent or any persons duly authorized by

him. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the

petitioner that the contentions of the petitioner are

contained in Exhibits P6 and P8 representations which are

liable to be considered in accordance with law.

4. The learned counsel appearing for respondents

1 and 2 submits that since Exhibits P6 and P8

representations have been submitted before the 2nd WP(C).No.25011 OF 2021

respondent, the same will be considered and appropriate

orders shall be passed after notice to the 3 rd respondent

as well.

Having considered the contentions advanced,

there will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to take up

Exhibits P6 and P8 representations submitted by the

petitioner and to consider and pass orders on the same

with notice to the petitioner, the 3 rd respondent and any

other affected parties, through any appropriate means

including video conferencing. Appropriate orders shall be

passed within a period of three weeks from the date of

receipt of copy of this judgment.

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE SSK/19/11 WP(C).No.25011 OF 2021

APPENDIX

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

TRUE COPY OF SALE DEED NO.3196/2006 DATED Exhibit P1 22.02.2006 OF ERNAKULAM SUB REGISTRY. TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN W.P(C)NO.33059/2017 Exhibit P2 DATED 23.10.2018 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE Exhibit P3 PETITIONER BEFORE THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KADAAVANTHRA POLICE.

TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 29.10.2021 ISSUED BY Exhibit P4 THE POLICE STATION, KADAVANTHRA TO THE PETITIONER.

TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT DATED 01.11.2021 IN Exhibit P5 O.S.NO.872/2021 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HON'BLE MUNSIFF'S COURT,-III, ERNAKULAM. TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED Exhibit P6 06.11.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 06.11.2021 Exhibit P7 ISSUED BY THE KOCHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION TO THE PETITIONER.

TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED Exhibit P8 08.11.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 08.11.2021 ISSUED BY Exhibit P9 THE KOCHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION TO THE PETITIONER.

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:          NIL



  SSK                           //TRUE COPY//           PA TO JUDGE