Akshaya Medical Centre vs Chelakkara Grama Panchayat
2022 Latest Caselaw 7907 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
  WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 8TH ASHADHA, 1944
                      WP(C) NO. 9865 OF 2022
PETITIONER

            AKSHAYA MEDICAL CENTRE
            REG NO 3837/2016, DOOR NO XXI/586/A&B, MAIN ROAD,
            MUKHARIKUNNU, CHELAKKARA P.O.THRISSUR-680 586,REP
            BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, RAJESH NAMBIATH, AGED 45
            YEARS, S/O KRISHNANKUTTY NAIR, KALATHIL NAMBIATH
            HOUSE, ANTHIMAHAKALAN KAVU P.O, PANGARAPPILLY,
            THRISSUR-680 586
            BY ADVS.
            K.B.GANGESH
            SMITHA CHATHANARAMBATH
            ATHIRA A.MENON


RESPONDENTS

    1       CHELAKKARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT
            REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.O.CHELAKKARA,
            THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 568
    2       THE SECRETARY,
            CHELAKKARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, P.O.CHELAKKARA,
            THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 568
    3       SASIKUMAR,
            S/O VELUKUTTY NAIR, PALANCHERRY HOUSE,
            KILIMANGALAM P.O.THRISSUR-680 586
            BY ADVS.
            C.A.CHACKO
            C.M.CHARISMA
            SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN , SC

     THIS     WRIT   PETITION    (CIVIL)     HAVING    COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION     ON   29.06.2022,    THE     COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).9865 of 2022
                                                2

                            P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                          ------------------------------
                             W.P.(C).9865 of 2022
                          -----------------------------
                           Dated : 29th June, 2022


                                      JUDGMENT

1. The above writ petition is filed with the following prayers :

(i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction to quash Exts.P7 and P8 orders issued by the 2 nd respondent.

(ii) A writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the respondents to take up the application for renewal of Ext.P1 licence preferred by the petitioner on 15.3.2022 forthwith and to consider the same on merits without insisting for a consent or fresh lease deed in respect of rooms bearing building numbers XXI/586A and 586B from the 3rd respondent landlord.

2. Exts.P7 and P8 orders issued by the 2nd respondent are

challenged in this writ petition. Petitioner is the

partnership firm constituted on 5.12.2016. Ext.P3 lease

deed was for 11 months executed by the 3 rd respondent in

favour of the petitioner. Ext.P1 licence was issued to the

petitioner for conduct of business in rented premises

covered by Ext.P3 lease deed. Petitioner/firm was

conducting a medical shop. Ext.P5 letter was issued by the

Panchayat requiring the petitioner to show cause as to WP(C).9865 of 2022

why the licence shall not be cancelled for want of consent

from the landlord. Petitioner submitted Ext.P6 reply

stating that consent from the landlord is not required for

renewal. Petitioner applied for renewal of Ext.P1 licence.

Ext.P7 order is issued by the Panchayat cancelling the

licence. Ext.P8 order was also issued by the Panchayath

rejecting the petitioner's application for renewal. Hence

this writ petition.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned counsel for the 3rd respondent. I also heard the

counsel for respondents 1 and 2.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated his

contentions and takes me through the judgments of the

Apex Court in Sudhakaran v. Corporation of

Trivandrum (2016 (3) KLT 247) which is produced as

Ext.P10 and submitted that even in the case of application

for obtaining licence for the first time, the tenant cannot

be deprived of running lawful business merely because the

landlord withheld consent. Learned counsel for the 3 rd

respondent submitted that a forged document is produced

for getting licence. Though a criminal case is filed before

the police, police has not registered the case. Therefore, a WP(C).9865 of 2022

private complaint is filed. Now Crime No.298/2022 is

registered by the police and is pending. More over, two

Suits are also pending before the Civil Court, one filed by

the petitioner and the other filed by the 3 rd respondent. In

the Suit filed by the petitioner, there is an interim

injunction against forceful eviction.

5. This Court considered the contentions of the petitioner

and respondents. I think, in the light of the decision cited

supra, the prayers in the writ petition are to be allowed

subject to the result of the criminal case and civil case.

6. It is relevant to quote paragraph 8 in Sudhakaran's case

which reads as under :

"After due consideration of the issues involved, we find merit in the submission made on behalf of the appellant. The statutory provision already quoted above shows that the requirement of consent of landlord is applicable only when a person intends to obtain a licence for the first time. Renewal of subsequent application for obtaining licence on expiry of the period of the existing licence. Even in the case of application for obtaining licence for the first time, the tenant cannot be deprived of running lawful business merely because the landlord withheld the consent. Valid tenancy itself has implied authority of the landlord for legitimate use of the premises by the tenant."

WP(C).9865 of 2022

7. In the light of the dictum laid down by the Apex Court, the

stand taken by the Panchayath will not stand. I make it

clear that issuance of the licence and renewal of the same

will be subject to the result of the Suit and also subject to

the result of the criminal case pending before the

investigating authority. Therefore, this writ petition is

disposed of with the following directions :

(i) Exts.P7 and P8 orders are set aside.

(ii) The 2nd respondent is directed to consider the

application for renewal of licence submitted by the

petitioner afresh, in accordance with law and allow the

same, if it is otherwise in order.

(iii) Issuance of licence will be subject to the final decision

in the Suit and criminal case pending investigation.

Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, Judge

Mrcs WP(C).9865 of 2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9865/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF LICENCE NO A9-

1410/2022/2021-22-470 DATED 1.3.2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT WHICH IS VAIID UP TO 31.3.2022 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF PARTNERSHIP DEED DATED 5.12.2016 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF LEASE DEED DATED 10.5.2019 EXECUTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER FIRM Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF BANK STATEMENT ISSUED BY BANK OF INDIA CHELAKKARA BRANCH TO THE PETITIONER ON 10.3.2022 EVIDENCING PAYMENT OF RENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO A9/1410/22 DATED 5.3.2022 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY REPLY DATED 14.3.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO A9-1410/22 DATED 21.3.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO A9-1822/22 DATED 21.3.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT REPORTED IN 2016(3) KLT 247