{"id":106939,"date":"2008-10-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-10-13T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-marys-hotels-pvt-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-october-2008"},"modified":"2014-07-22T04:28:13","modified_gmt":"2014-07-21T22:58:13","slug":"st-marys-hotels-pvt-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-october-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-marys-hotels-pvt-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-october-2008","title":{"rendered":"St.Mary”S Hotels Pvt. Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 14 October, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
St.Mary”S Hotels Pvt. Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 14 October, 2008<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 14228 of 2008(R)\n\n\n1. ST.MARY\"S HOTELS PVT. LTD.,KODIMATHA,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n2. T.O.ABRAHAM,S\/O.LATE KURUVILLA UNNITHAN,\n3. BINU ZACHARIA,S\/O.LATE T.S.SKARIAH,\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,\n\n3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,\n\n4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,\n\n5. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,\n\n6. T.O.ALEYAS,S\/O.KURUVILA UNNITHAN,\n\n7. GIGGY KURIAKOSE,\n\n8. ABRAHAM BABY,\n\n9. BOBBY T.KURIAKOSE,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI (SR.)\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.A.M.SHAFFIQUE (SR.)\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR\nThe Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI\n\n Dated :14\/10\/2008\n\n O R D E R\n          K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.\n           -----------------------------------------------------\n                   W.P.(C)No.14228 OF 2008 R\n            -----------------------------------------------------\n            DATED THIS THE 14th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2008\n\n                            J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
Balakrishnan Nair, J.\n<\/p>\n
      The first petitioner is a Private Limited Company. The second<\/p>\n
petitioner is its Managing Director. The 3rd petitioner is one of its<\/p>\n
Directors. The Company is running a hotel called “Windsor Castle”.<\/p>\n
According to the petitioners, respondents 6 to 9 were the erstwhile<\/p>\n
Directors of the Company.        Later, they were removed from the<\/p>\n
Directorship by the General Body Meeting held in 2003.        The decision<\/p>\n
of the Director Board of the first petitioner-Company to allot shares<\/p>\n
worth Rs.2,20,000\/- to the second petitioner, which tilted the balance<\/p>\n
in the share holding, was annulled by the Company Law Board. The<\/p>\n
Board’s decision was reversed by this Court in the appeal filed by the<\/p>\n
petitioners. Now, the matter is pending before the Hon’ble Supreme<\/p>\n
Court in Civil Appeal No.3446\/06, filed by respondents 6 to 9. The<\/p>\n
Apex Court passed various interim orders in the said case from time to<\/p>\n
time. Last of the orders passed is Exhibit P8. The said order reads as<\/p>\n
follows:\n<\/p>\n
               ” In view of the order passed by this Court on<\/p>\n
W.P.(C)No. 14228\/08               -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
         27.2.2008 with the following effect, most of the orders<\/p>\n
         passed against the applicants have been withdrawn.<\/p>\n
         This application has therefore become infructuous. But<\/p>\n
         all the same appellants-respondents in this application<\/p>\n
         are directed not to interfere with the affairs of the hotel<\/p>\n
         but the applicants are directed to submit monthly<\/p>\n
         accounts to the respondents and take all major decisions<\/p>\n
         in consultation with them.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
The petitioners 2 and 3 submit, going by the said order, they are entitled<\/p>\n
to manage the affairs of the first petitioner-Company.           The party<\/p>\n
respondents herein are entitled to get monthly accounts and also have a<\/p>\n
right to be consulted, when major decisions are taken concerning the<\/p>\n
running of the company. On 3.5.2008 respondents 6 to 9 trespassed into<\/p>\n
the hotel, manhandled the second petitioner and indulged in violence.<\/p>\n
The said respondents were accompanied by a goonda by name<\/p>\n
Mr.Rajendran. Pointing out the incident which took place on 3.5.2008,<\/p>\n
the second petitioner filed representations before the concerned police<\/p>\n
officers, copies of which are produced as Exhibit P11 series.         The<\/p>\n
petitioners submit, the police did not take any action on those<\/p>\n
representations, but, instead registered a crime against them, based on<\/p>\n
the petition filed by the aforementioned respondents. The petitioners 2<\/p>\n
W.P.(C)No. 14228\/08               -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
and 3 are being unnecessarily implicated in false cases registered by the<\/p>\n
police on the motion made by the party respondents. They are made<\/p>\n
accused in seven cases. They also point out that five cases have been<\/p>\n
registered against respondents 6 to 9. The petitioners submit, in view of<\/p>\n
the orders of the Apex Court, the party respondents have no legal right to<\/p>\n
interfere with the    management of the affairs of the company.       The<\/p>\n
commissions and omissions of respondents 6 to 9 on 3.5.2008 will<\/p>\n
amount to interfering with the management of the company. Further,<\/p>\n
the said respondents are indulging in criminal activities. So, the police<\/p>\n
have a duty to intervene and grant necessary protection to the<\/p>\n
petitioners. Therefore, this writ petition is filed, seeking the following<\/p>\n
reliefs:\n<\/p>\n
      “1. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ,<\/p>\n
          order or direction, directing the 3rd respondent to take<\/p>\n
          appropriate measures to give adequate and sufficient<\/p>\n
          police protection   to the second petitioner to run the<\/p>\n
          hotel Windsor Castle, Kodimatha, Kottayam, owned by<\/p>\n
          the 1st petitioner company and to prevent illegal entry of<\/p>\n
          respondents 6 to 9 in the said premises and commission<\/p>\n
          of crimes in the hotel premises.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
        2.  Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate<\/p>\n
W.P.(C)No. 14228\/08               -4-<\/span><\/p>\n
           writ, order or direction, directing the 3rd respondent to<\/p>\n
           issue necessary directions to 4th and 5th respondents to<\/p>\n
           refrain from harassing the petitioners and their staff any<\/p>\n
           further and not to summon the petitioners and their<\/p>\n
           staff any further and not to summon the petitioners and<\/p>\n
           their staff to the police station without following the<\/p>\n
           procedure established by law.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      2. The 6th respondent has filed a counter affidavit, resisting the<\/p>\n
prayers in the writ petition.     In said the affidavit, it is stated that<\/p>\n
respondents 6 to 9 are still the Directors of the company.          The 2nd<\/p>\n
petitioner’s claim that he is the Managing Director, is not admitted by<\/p>\n
them. The 6th respondent has denied all the allegations against him and<\/p>\n
other party respondents. Regarding the incident on 3.5.2008, the said<\/p>\n
respondent has submitted that he has been allotted and has been using<\/p>\n
room No.409 of Hotel Windsor Castle, run by the 1st petitioner company,<\/p>\n
as per the policy decision of the management, from the beginning of the<\/p>\n
functioning of the hotel. Similarly, the 2nd petitioner was allotted room<\/p>\n
No.201 in the said hotel for his use.         On 3.5.2008, when the 6th<\/p>\n
respondent entered his room, it was found that strangers were occupying<\/p>\n
it and the records kept there were missing. When the 6th respondent went<\/p>\n
to the reception and complained about the incident, the 2nd petitioner and<\/p>\n
W.P.(C)No. 14228\/08                -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
others tried to snatch away the key of his room by use of force. He was<\/p>\n
threatened and abused by the persons present there along with the 2nd<\/p>\n
petitioner.   So, he filed a complaint before the police on 3.5.2008 as<\/p>\n
Ext.R6(b). Based on that, a crime has been registered against the 2nd<\/p>\n
petitioner.   The petitioners 2 and 3 are accused in several crimes. One<\/p>\n
of them is for manhandling the local Sub Inspector of Police. Ext.R6(i) is<\/p>\n
the F.I.R registered in the said incident.      The 6th respondent further<\/p>\n
submits that the intention of filing this petition for police protection is to<\/p>\n
drive respondents 6 to 9 out from the premises of the hotel and to deny<\/p>\n
them the rights flowing from the orders of the Apex Court.<\/p>\n
       3. The learned Government Pleader, upon instructions submitted<\/p>\n
that 10 crimes have been registered against the 2nd petitioner and others<\/p>\n
and 7 crimes have been registered against the party respondents. The<\/p>\n
police have acted promptly, as and when offences were reported. The<\/p>\n
official respondents also deny the allegation of the 2nd petitioner that he<\/p>\n
has been falsely implicated in the crimes registered by the police.<\/p>\n
Further, it is submitted, proceedings under Section 107 Cr.P.C have been<\/p>\n
initiated against both the parties.     The learned Government Pleader<\/p>\n
pointed out that both the parties have executed bonds before the Sub<\/p>\n
Divisional Magistrate, undertaking to keep peace.<\/p>\n
       4. The petitioners have filed a reply affidavit, dealing with the<\/p>\n
W.P.(C)No. 14228\/08                -6-<\/span><\/p>\n
averments in the counter affidavit of the 6th respondent. It is also stated<\/p>\n
in the reply affidavit that the persons arrested along with the 2nd<\/p>\n
petitioner were not goondas, but employees of the hotel.<\/p>\n
      5. The dispute between the petitioners and respondents 6 to 9 is a<\/p>\n
civil dispute concerning the right to manage the affairs of the 1st<\/p>\n
petitioner company. The Apex Court has already passed orders, as per<\/p>\n
Exhibit P8 providing for the interim management of the affairs of the<\/p>\n
hotel run by the company. If the said order is violated by any of the<\/p>\n
parties, the remedy of the aggrieved party is to move the Apex Court and<\/p>\n
not to approach the local police.      The police have no authority or<\/p>\n
jurisdiction to meddle in this dispute. The police cannot be authorised to<\/p>\n
consider whether there is any violation of the order of the Apex Court and<\/p>\n
to take remedial action. In this case, the petitioners have moved this<\/p>\n
Court for police protection, based on an incident, which allegedly, took<\/p>\n
place on 3.5.2008. The party respondents and the police give a different<\/p>\n
version about the said incident. In this jurisdiction, we cannot decide<\/p>\n
which of the versions is correct. Therefore, we think, it is not proper for<\/p>\n
this Court to issue any direction to the police, based on the alleged<\/p>\n
incident that took place on 3.5.2008. Further, we notice that the police<\/p>\n
have promptly taken action whenever cognizable offences were reported.<\/p>\n
They have altogether registered 17 crimes. Every accused in a criminal<\/p>\n
W.P.(C)No. 14228\/08                -7-<\/span><\/p>\n
case will plead that he is innocent and the other side is at fault. But, we<\/p>\n
cannot go into such disputes in this proceedings. It is for the competent<\/p>\n
criminal court to decide all such contentions. Having regard to the nature<\/p>\n
of the allegations and counter allegations, we are not persuaded to pass<\/p>\n
any order, directing the police to involve themselves in this dispute in<\/p>\n
favour of one side or the other. So, the prayer for an order for police<\/p>\n
protection is declined.    But, needless to say, as and when cognizable<\/p>\n
offences are reported by either side, we are sure, the police will take<\/p>\n
effective action in accordance with law and if found necessary, the police<\/p>\n
will take action under Section 149 Cr.P.C also, to prevent commission of<\/p>\n
cognizable offences. As mentioned earlier, the police have been taking<\/p>\n
action promptly in the past. So, it is unnecessary to issue any direction<\/p>\n
to the police as to how they should deal with the commission of<\/p>\n
cognizable offences.\n<\/p>\n
      The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                       K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n
                       M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n
dsn<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court St.Mary”S Hotels Pvt. Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 14 October, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 14228 of 2008(R) 1. ST.MARY”S HOTELS PVT. LTD.,KODIMATHA, … Petitioner 2. T.O.ABRAHAM,S\/O.LATE KURUVILLA UNNITHAN, 3. BINU ZACHARIA,S\/O.LATE T.S.SKARIAH, Vs 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE … Respondent 2. DIRECTOR GENERAL […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-106939","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSt.Mary"S Hotels Pvt. Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 14 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-marys-hotels-pvt-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-october-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"St.Mary"S Hotels Pvt. Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 14 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-marys-hotels-pvt-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-october-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-10-13T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-07-21T22:58:13+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/st-marys-hotels-pvt-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-october-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/st-marys-hotels-pvt-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-october-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"St.Mary”S Hotels Pvt. Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 14 October, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-07-21T22:58:13+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/st-marys-hotels-pvt-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-october-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1521,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/st-marys-hotels-pvt-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-october-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/st-marys-hotels-pvt-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-october-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/st-marys-hotels-pvt-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-october-2008\",\"name\":\"St.Mary\\\"S Hotels Pvt. Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 14 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-07-21T22:58:13+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/st-marys-hotels-pvt-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-october-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/st-marys-hotels-pvt-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-october-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/st-marys-hotels-pvt-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-october-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"St.Mary”S Hotels Pvt. Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 14 October, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"St.Mary\"S Hotels Pvt. Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 14 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-marys-hotels-pvt-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-october-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"St.Mary\"S Hotels Pvt. Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 14 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-marys-hotels-pvt-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-october-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-10-13T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-07-21T22:58:13+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-marys-hotels-pvt-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-october-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-marys-hotels-pvt-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-october-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"St.Mary”S Hotels Pvt. Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 14 October, 2008","datePublished":"2008-10-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-07-21T22:58:13+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-marys-hotels-pvt-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-october-2008"},"wordCount":1521,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-marys-hotels-pvt-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-october-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-marys-hotels-pvt-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-october-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-marys-hotels-pvt-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-october-2008","name":"St.Mary\"S Hotels Pvt. Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 14 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-10-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-07-21T22:58:13+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-marys-hotels-pvt-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-october-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-marys-hotels-pvt-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-october-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-marys-hotels-pvt-ltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-october-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"St.Mary”S Hotels Pvt. Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 14 October, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/106939","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=106939"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/106939\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=106939"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=106939"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=106939"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}