Kerala High Court
Dwaraj.S vs The Secretary on 5 September, 2024
Author: A.Muhamed Mustaque
Bench: A.Muhamed Mustaque
W.A.Nos.1093,1111&1127 of 2024 1
2024:KER:67437
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.MANU
THURSDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 / 14TH BHADRA, 1946
WA NO. 1093 OF 2024
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 27.06.2024 IN WP(C) NO.21828
OF 2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/REVIEW PETITIONERS:
1 RAJESH R,
AGED 51 YEARS
S/O. RAVI,MOON WIND, TC 43/526, KAMALESWARAM,
MANACADU P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695009
2 DWARAJ S,
AGED 54 YEARS
S/O. SADASIVAN,ELAMKAMVILAKATHU VEEDU, TC 39/1739,
MANACADU P.O,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695009
BY ADVS.
ENOCH DAVID SIMON JOEL
DERICK MATHAI SAJI
KARAN SCARIA ABRAHAM
KAROL MATHEWS SEBASTIAN ALENCHERRY
LEO LUKOSE
RONY JOSE
S.SREEDEV
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS :
1 THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CORPORATION,
VIKAS BHAVAN P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN - 695033
W.A.Nos.1093,1111&1127 of 2024 2
2024:KER:67437
2 SECRETARY,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CORPORATION, VIKAS BHAVAN
P.O.THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695033
3 SUDHEER KUMAR M,
S/O. MRTHYUNJAYA PANICKER,PAVITHRAM, AMBALATHVILA,
KURUMANDAL, PARAVOOR P.O, KOLLAM, PIN - 691301
4 SUNIL KUMAR M,
S/O. MRTHYUNJAYA PANICKER, SUDHODHANA,
TC 43/29,THOTTAM, MANACADU P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695009
BY SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY, STANDING COUNSEL
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.09.2024, ALONG WITH WA.1111/2024, 1127/2024, THE COURT ON
THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.Nos.1093,1111&1127 of 2024 3
2024:KER:67437
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.MANU
THURSDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 / 14TH BHADRA, 1946
WA NO. 1111 OF 2024
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 27.06.2024 IN WP(C) NO.39559
OF 2022 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS :
1 A. DWARAJ,
AGED 53 YEARS
S/O. SADASIVAN, AGED 53 YEARS,
T/C.39/1739, ELANKOM VILAKOM VEEDU,
MANACAUD P.O., TRIVANANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695009
2 RAJESH R.,
AGED 51 YEARS
S/O. RAVI, T/C. 43/526, MOONWIND, KAMALESWARAM,
MANACAUD P. O., THIRUVANATHAPURAM, PIN - 695009
BY ADVS.
ENOCH DAVID SIMON JOEL
S.SREEDEV
RONY JOSE
LEO LUKOSE
KAROL MATHEWS SEBASTIAN ALENCHERRY
DERICK MATHAI SAJI
KARAN SCARIA ABRAHAM
W.A.Nos.1093,1111&1127 of 2024 4
2024:KER:67437
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS :
1 THE SECRETARY,
CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695027
2 SUNILKUMAR M.,
AGED 35 YEARS
S/O. LATE AMBIKA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, SUDHADHARA,
SNDP LANE, THOTTAM, MANACAUD P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695009
3 OMBUDSMAN FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENTS,
OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT,
BARTON HILL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695035
BY SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY, STANDING COUNSEL
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.09.2024, ALONG WITH WA.1093/2024 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.Nos.1093,1111&1127 of 2024 5
2024:KER:67437
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.MANU
THURSDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 / 14TH BHADRA, 1946
WA NO. 1127 OF 2024
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 27.06.2024 IN WP(C) NO.15379
OF 2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS :
1 DWARAJ.S ,
AGED 54 YEARS
S/O SADASIVAN,
RESIDING AT ELAMKAMVILAKATHU VEEDU VEEDU,
TC.39/1739, MANACAUD P.O, MUTTATHARA VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695009
2 RAJESH R,
AGED 51 YEARS
S/O RAVI RESIDING AT MOON WIND, TC 43/526
KAMALESWARAM, MANACAUD P.O.
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695009
BY ADVS.
ENOCH DAVID SIMON JOEL
S.SREEDEV
RONY JOSE
LEO LUKOSE
KAROL MATHEWS SEBASTIAN ALENCHERRY
DERICK MATHAI SAJI
KARAN SCARIA ABRAHAM
W.A.Nos.1093,1111&1127 of 2024 6
2024:KER:67437
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS :
1 THE SECRETARY,
THE CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
CORPORATION BUILDING,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695033
2 SUDHEER KUMAR M,
S/O MRYTHUNJYA PANICKER,
RESIDING AT PAVITHRAM, AMBALATHUVILA,
KURUMNADAL, PARAVOOR.P.O,
KOLLAM, PIN - 691301
3 SUNIL KUMAR.M ,
S/O MRYTHUNJAYA PANIKER,
RESIDING AT SUDHODHANA TC.43/29,
THOTTAM MANACAUD P.O., PIN - 695009
BY SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY, STANDING COUNSEL
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.09.2024, ALONG WITH WA.1093/2024 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.Nos.1093,1111&1127 of 2024 7
2024:KER:67437
JUDGMENT
A.Muhamed Mustaque, Acg.C.J.
The appellants Rajesh and Dwaraj along with Ambika Devi
were owners of two cents of property along with the building
comprised in Resurvey No.11/7 and 11/244 in Pattom Village in
Thiruvananthapuram District. They were conducting a hotel
business by name 'New Amma Restaurant'. Ambika Devi passed
away. Before her death, she claimed to have executed a will in
favour of her children, namely Sudheer Kumar and Sunil Kumar,
who are the respondents herein. The dispute arose in regard to
running the hotel.
2. The respondents would submit that without their
consent, a trade license was obtained from the
Thiruvananthapuram Corporation by the appellants Rajesh and
Dwaraj. The matter reached at different levels for consideration
including the Ombudsman for the Local Self Government
Institution. The Ombudsman ordered that the Corporation shall
not consider renewal of application without hearing the children of
2024:KER:67437
Ambika Devi.
3. In the meanwhile, Rajesh and Dwaraj approached
this Court for renewal of license for the year 2023-2024 in W.P.
(C)No.39559 of 2022. During the pendency of the case, they
obtained a license. Thereafter, they filed another W.P.
(C)No.15379 of 2024 for renewal of license for the year 2024-
2025. The renewal application was rejected. Challenging that
order, a new writ petition was filed i.e., W.P.(C)No.21828 of 2024.
4. The learned Single Judge considered all writ
petitions together and dismissed them with costs of Rs.25,000/-
(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) on the ground that Rajesh
and Dwaraj suppressed the pendency of W.P.(C)No.39559 of 2022
and W.P.(C)No.15379 of 2024 in the latest W.P.(C)No.21828 of
2024.
5. The question is whether there was any
suppression. We perused the pleadings in the matter. In
Paragraph 12 and 14, the appellants Rajesh and Dwaraj clearly
stated about the pendency of the cases. However, that was not
mentioned in the affidavit as required under the Rules. That
means there was no malafides on the part of the appellants.
2024:KER:67437
Nevertheless, they committed a grave error by not mentioning the
same in the affidavit.
6. The question is then whether the appellants
Rajesh and Dwaraj were entitled for renewal of license. There is
no dispute to the fact that they were the original owners and had
running license with the mother of the contesting respondents.
They are not strangers. Therefore, they are entitled for renewal of
license. Any inter se private dispute among parties will have to be
resolved through a Civil Court. In public law, The question will
have to be considered whether the parties are entitled for license
or not.
7. We note that the hotel was established much
before the party respondents obtained right through the will which
was established by their mother along with the appellants.
Therefore, we are of the view that the appellants would be entitled
for license subject to any orders passed by the competent Civil
Court. Accordingly, we direct the Corporation to issue license.
However, in view of the fact that details were not furnished in the
affidavit, we must hasten to add that cost must be mulcted on the
appellants. The cost has been reduced to Rs.5,000/-. It shall be
2024:KER:67437
paid within two weeks.
Accordingly, the impugned judgment is set aside and
these writ appeals stand allowed.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE,
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
S.MANU,
JUDGE
rkj
