Kerala High Court
Thayyil Nanu vs Corporation Of Calicut on 7 July, 2025
2025:KER:49797
W.P.(C).No.2961 of 2014
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.MANU
MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 16TH ASHADHA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 2961 OF 2014
PETITIONER:
THAYYIL NANU,
AGED 64 YEARS,
S/O.KUNHIRAMAN, KALLIL HOUSE, VALAYAM P.O,
VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE
BY ADV SRI.P.G.JAYASHANKAR
RESPONDENTS:
1 CORPORATION OF CALICUT,
CORPORATION OFFICE, P.B NO.1115, CALICUT 673032.
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, CALICUT 673 020.
3 DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY),
REVENUE RECOVERY OFFICE, VATAKARA, 673 502.
BY ADVS.
SHRI.K.D.BABU,SC,KOZHIKODE CORPORATION
SRI.G.SANTHOSH KUMAR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 07.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:49797
W.P.(C).No.2961 of 2014
2
S.MANU, J.
--------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C).No.2961 of 2014
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 07th day of July, 2025
JUDGMENT
Petitioner challenges Ext.P5 demand notice issued by the
Secretary of the respondent Corporation and Exts.P8 and P9
demand notices issued under the provisions of the Revenue
Recovery Act.
2. By Ext.P5 notice dated 11.3.2013 the petitioner was
called upon to remit an amount of Rs.2,68,045/-. In Ext.P5
notice, reference is made to the judgment in O.S.No.830/97
(later re-numbered as O.S.No.132/2000). In the opening
paragraph of Ext.P5, it was stated that late Mr.John Iype was
the licesee of shop room No.4 in old block, I.G. Road, and by
the judgment in O.S.No.132/2000, it was decreed that dues
pertaining to the said room shall be recovered from the legal
heirs of Mr.John Iype and his partners. Petitioner was mentioned
2025:KER:49797
as a partner in Ext.P5. Further it was stated that the total
amount due was equally divided and the legal heirs as well as
the partners should pay Rs.2,68,045/- each. Petitioner
submitted Ext.P6 reply. Thereafter, Exts.P8 and P9 demand
notices were issued under the provisions of the Revenue
Recovery Act by the 3rd respondent on the basis of requisition
from the Secretary, Kozhikode Corporation.
3. Petitioner approached this Court after receiving
Exts.P8 and P9 notices and this Court stayed all further
proceedings. Corporation has filed counter affidavit.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
reference in Ext.P5 to the judgment in the civil suit shows that
the Corporation has proceeded against the petitioner without
proper application of mind. He made reference to the copy of
the judgment dated 20th October 2001 of the Subordinate
Judges' Court, Kozhikode. It shows that the suit filed by the
petitioner herein was for injunction and it was dismissed as the
2025:KER:49797
counsel for the plaintiff reported 'no instructions'. The learned
counsel, referring to the written statement filed by the
Corporation in the said suit which has been produced as Ext.P2,
pointed out that the Corporation had pleaded before the civil
court that there was no relationship between the petitioner
herein and the Corporation in respect of Room No.4. It was also
pleaded by the Corporation that it was not aware of a
partnership deed dated 1.4.1999, said to have been executed
by the plaintiff and others. Corporation specifically stated in the
written statement that license with respect to the room was
granted to late Mr.John Iype.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the
Corporation proceeded against the petitioner ignoring the fact
that there was no legally binding agreement/arrangement
between the Corporation and the petitioner regarding Room
No.4. Petitioner was not liable for clearing the arrears of license
fee. There is no material to show that the room was utilized for
2025:KER:49797
the benefit of the partnership firm. He hence contended that
Corporation has no right to claim any amount from the
petitioner with respect to Room No.4. Learned counsel also
submitted that the alleged liability is time barred.
6. Learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation on the
other hand submitted that the petitioner herein, one
Mr.Sunil.V.R. who is the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.7422/2014 and
late Mr.John Iype were partners of 'Noble Enterprises', a
partnership firm. On 10.7.1997, one Mr.T.P.Purushothaman, late
Mr.John Iype and Mr.V.R.Sunil made a joint application to
transfer the license to the name of Mr.V.R.Sunil. Petitioner filed
suit to prevent the transfer. Later, the room was offered to
Mr.Sunil after dismissal of the suit, but, he refused to clear the
arrears and hence the room was re-allotted. The learned
Standing Counsel submitted that Corporation has rightly
proceeded against the petitioner also, as he himself had claimed
that he was a partner of late Mr.John Iype.
2025:KER:49797
7. By a separate judgment W.P.(C)No.7422/2014 filed
by Mr.Sunil.V.R. has been allowed. I have found that there was
no legally binding arrangement between the petitioner in the
said writ petition and the Corporation. Same is the situation in
the case at hand also. Moreover, in O.S.No.132/2000 filed by
the petitioner herein Corporation filed written statement stating
that there was no relationship between the petitioner and the
Corporation in respect of Room No.4. Hence, the demand raised
by the Corporation against the petitioner is not legally
sustainable.
Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed. Exts.P5, P8 and
P9 notices are quashed.
Sd/-
S.MANU
JUDGE
skj
2025:KER:49797
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2961/2014
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1. COPY OF THE PLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER
DATED 12.09.97 IN OS 830/97 BEFORE THE
MUNSIFF COURT, KOZHIKODE.
EXHIBIT P2. COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE
IST RESPONDENT DATED 05.01.99 IN OS 830/97.
EXHIBIT P3. COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 20.10.01 IN OS 132
OF 2000 ON THE FILES OF THE SUB COURT,
KOZHIKODE.
EXHIBIT P4. COPY OF THE DECREE DATED 20.10.01 IN OS 132
OF 2000 ON THE FILES OF THE SUB COURT,
KOZHIKODE.
EXHIBIT P5. COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE BEARING
NO.A29/19830/95 DATED 11.03.13 ISSUED BY THE
IST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6. COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 27.03.13 FILED BY THE
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P7. COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT SLIP DATED
27.03.13 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8. COPY OF THE NOTICE UNDER S.7 BEARING
NO.E427/13-14/CORPORATION DATED 04.12.13.
EXHIBIT P9. COPY OF THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 34, BEARING
NO.E427/13-14/CORPORATION DATED 04.12.13.
EXHIBIT P10. COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED 28.12.13
ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P11. COPY OF THE REPLY BEARING NO.A29/19830/95
DATED 06.01.14 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P12. COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 13.01.14 FILED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
