Chandy Koruthu vs Thiruvalla Municipality on 23 October, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 29062 of 2009(C)


1. CHANDY KORUTHU, KANJIRATHARA HOUSE,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THIRUVALLA MUNICIPALITY,REPRESENTED
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SECRETARY,THIRUVALLA MUNICIPALITY,

3. THE TAHSILDAR,TALUK OFFICE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.P.PRADEEP

                For Respondent  :SRI.S.SUBHASH CHAND, SC.THIRUVALLA MUNC

The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN

 Dated :23/10/2009

 O R D E R
         THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.

  = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

            W.P.(C).No.29062 of 2009-C

  = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

      Dated this the 23rd day of October, 2009.

                     JUDGMENT

1.The petitioner is the father of a person who was

granted a licence in relation to a shopping room

or hall of the first respondent Municipality. The

licensee died in 2003. According to the

petitioner, he is continuing the activity as a

legal representative of the deceased licensee and

has also filed certain applications for transfer

of licence etc. Petitioner states that he has

applied for certificate of heirship and that the

said matter has reached the stage of publication.

In the meanwhile, following Ext.P2 notice, the

premises has been locked up by the Municipality.

2.In the counter affidavit, Ext.P2 is supported by

Ext.R2(d). The petitioner’s status as a legal

representative of the deceased licensee is not in

WPC29062/2009 -: 2 :-

dispute. But, technically, the heirship

certificate is yet to reach the Municipality.

This appears to be the reason of issuance of

Exts.P2 and R2(d). However, it appears that when

the premises was locked up by the Revenue

Inspector, he has, in his report, stated that one

Suresh was staying with his family as occupying

the premises. The counter affidavit proceeds as

if Exts.P2 and R2(d) etc. were also issued on

that ground. Exts.P2 and R2(d) are not issued on

any such ground on a reading of those documents.

Having regard to the totality of the facts and

circumstances, I am of the view that as the

petitioner’s application for heirship certificate

is pending consideration, it needs to be stated

that the Municipality should grant the petitioner

an opportunity to produce the certificate and

seek transfer of the licence. Hence, it is

ordered that the room/hall will be re-opened

immediately and petitioner put back in

possession. He shall be given three months’ time

WPC29062/2009 -: 3 :-

to produce the heirship certificate and the

Municipality will, then, process the application

for transfer of licence provided the petitioner

produces everything that is needed for such

transfer. It will be open to the Municipality to

reasonably hike the rent. The writ petition is

ordered accordingly.

THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN,
JUDGE.

Sha/041109