Kerala High Court
M/S Shyam And Vivek Brothers Private ... vs The State Of Kerala on 8 December, 2023
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 36772 OF 2023
PETITIONER :
M/S SHYAM AND VIVEK BROTHERS PRIVATE LIMITED,
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR K V MOHANAN,
AGED 72 YEARS,
S/O VELAYUDHAN, RESIDING IN THE ADDRESS
KALLATE HOUSE, KUTTOOR P O, THRISSUR DISTRICT,
PIN - 680 013
BY ADV G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
RESPONDENTS :
1 THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT,
LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM P O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001
2 THE THRISSUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
OFFICE OF THE THRISSUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
MUNICIPAL OFFICE ROAD, THRISSUR P O,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680 001
3 THE SECRETARY, THRISSUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY,
THRISSUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
MUNICIPAL OFFICE ROAD, THRISSUR P O,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680 001
4 THE MANAPURAM HOTELS PVT. LTD.,
KURUPPAM ROAD, VELIYANNUR DESOM P O,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PINCODE 680 001
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR M M ABDUL BASHEER,
AGED 62 YEARS, S/O MUCHETH SAITHU MUHAMMED,
RESIDING AT MUCHETH HOUSE, V C AHAMMADUNNI ROAD,
WEST VELIYATHUNADU, KARUMALLOOR VILLAGE,
ALANGAD DESOM, PARAVUR TALUK,
PARAVUR P O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 683511
WP(C) NO. 36772 OF 2023
2
5 GIRINDRA GLOBAL HOSPITALITY,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER DHEERAJ
DHEERAJ D, NO. 36/518, SHORNUR ROAD,
THIRUVAMBADI P O, THRISSUR DISTRICT,
PINCODE - 680 022
6 DHEERAJ D.,
S/O GIRIJAVALLABAN,
RESIDING IN THE ADDRESS NARAYANANKATTIL HOUSE,
VENGINISSERY P O, PARALAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT,
PIN - 680 575
7 GIRIJAVALLABAN,
FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, RESIDING IN THE ADDRESS
NARAYANANKARTTIL HOUSE, VENGINISSERY P O,
PARALAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680 575
8 LATHA KALLENGATTU,
RESIDING IN THE ADDRESS NARAYANANKATTIL HOUSE,
VENGINISSERY P O, PARALAM,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680 575
BY ADVS.
SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL
SREEKALA KRISHNADAS
AJITH VISWANATHAN
C.VIVEK(K/000304/1999)
ASHLY JAMES(K/001573/2018)
DEVIKA WARRIER(K/001703/2023)
BONIFUS P.A.(K/2539/2022)
AJAIY BASKAR(K/001572/2020)
P.VISWANATHAN (SR.)(K/000283/1986)
R1 BY SMT.K.AMMINIKUTTY, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER
R2 & R3 BY SRI.SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL
R4 BY ADV.SREEKALA KRISHNADAS
R5 TO R8 BY ADV.P.VISWANATHAN (SR.)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 08.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 36772 OF 2023
3
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
W.P.(C) No.36772 of 2023
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dated this the 8th day of December, 2023
JUDGMENT
Petitioner seeks for a direction to entertain their application for
trade licence and to dispose of the same in a time bound manner.
Petitioner has also sought for a direction not to entertain any application
for licence from respondents 5 to 8.
2. The property belonging to the 4th respondent was initially leased
out to respondents 5 to 8. It was alleged that they had surrendered the
building and thereafter a fresh lease agreement was executed by the 4 th
respondent with the petitioner. However, when the petitioner applied for
licence for its business purposes, the 3 rd respondent refused to entertain
the said application or pass appropriate orders pointing out the absence
of any evidence indicating surrender of the property by respondents 5 to
8.
3. Having heard Sri.G.Sreekumar Chelur, the learned counsel
for the petitioner, Smt.K.Amminikutty, the learned Senior Government
Pleader, Sri.Santhosh P.Poduval, the learned Standing Counsel for
respondents 2 and 3, Smt.Sreekala Krishnadas, the learned counsel for
the 4th respondent as well as Sri.P.Viswanathan, the learned Senior
Counsel duly instructed by Sri.Ajith Viswanathan, on behalf of
WP(C) NO. 36772 OF 2023
respondents 5 to 8, I am of the view this writ petition can be disposed of
since the dispute between the parties are no longer in existence.
4. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondents 5 to 8
fairly submitted that the building was surrendered to the landlord and
that they have not even applied for any licence for the said premises. It
was further submitted that though there are disputes pending between
respondents 4 and 5, the same is not a matter to be reckoned for
considering the application for licence submitted by the petitioner.
5. In view of the above, there will be a direction to the 3 rd
respondent to accept, process and pass appropriate orders on the
application for licence submitted by the petitioner produced as Ext.P4, as
expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of 30 days from the
date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE
RKM
WP(C) NO. 36772 OF 2023
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 36772/2023
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LEASE AGREEMENT ENTERED
INTO BY THE PETITIONER WITH THE 4TH
RESPONDENT DATED 12.10.2023
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE
RENT CONTROL COURT IN R C P NO. 83 OF 2021
DATED 06.12.2022
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT FILED BEFORE
THE RENT CONTROL COURT DATED 31.03.2023
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY
THE PETITIONER WITH THE DOCUMENTS ANNEXED
THERETO FILED DATED 02.11.2023
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT DATED 02.11.2023
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LEASE DEED EXECUTED BY
THE FORMER LESSEE WITH THE 4TH RESPONDENT
DATED 26.09.2018
