Disposed

P. Ramachandran v. Travancore Devaswom Board

Kerala HC1 Aug 2012WP(C)/18028/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged a 10% rent enhancement by the Devaswom Board for shop-rooms in Karunagappally. The Court refrained from interference, recognising it as income generation rather than a social obligation, but clarified that future increases require representation and a hearing.

What did the court decide?

Rent enhancement allowed for two years; direction for opportunity of hearing before any further increase.

P. Ramachandran Vs Travancore Devaswom Board — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST 2012/10TH SRAVANA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 18028 of 2012 (C)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

1. P. RAMACHANDRAN, KADUVINAL KIZHAKKATHIL, KADATHOOR, K.S.PURAM P.O., BLOCK NO.II, SHOP NO.1 (DOUBLE ROOM) DEVASWOM SHOPPING COMPLEX, PUTHIYAKAVU, KARUNAGAPPALLY.

¶8

2. N.GEETHAKRISHNAN,

¶9

VALLIYATHU VEEDU, KADATHOOR, THAZHAVA, BLOCK NO.II SHOP NO.1 (SINGLE ROOM)

¶10

DEVASWOM SHOPPING COMPLEX,

¶11

PUTHIYAKAVU, KARUNAGAPPALLY.

¶12

3. G.REGHUNATH,

¶13

DEVAKI MANDIRAM, PADA NORTH, KARUNAGAPPALLY

¶14

BLOCK NO.II, SHOP NO.2 (SINGLE ROOM)

¶15

DEVASWOM SHOPPING COMPLEX,

¶16

PUTHIYAKAVU, KARUNAGAPALLY.

¶17

4. K.VIDHYADHARAN,

¶18

VIDHYA, PADA SOUTH, KARUNAGAPALLY, BLOCK NO.II,

¶19

SHOP NO.2 (DOUBLE ROOM) DEVASWOM SHOPPING COMPLEX, PUTHIYAKAVU, KARUNAGAPPALLY.

¶20

5. YESODHARAN,

¶21

VELMURUKA BHAVAN, PULIYOORVANCHI NORTH, THAZHAVA,

¶22

BLOCK NO.II,SHOP NO.3 (SINGLE ROOM) DEVASWOM SHOPPING

¶23

COMPLEX, PUTHIYAKAVU, KARUNAGAPPALLY.

¶24

6. P.MANOHARAN,

¶25

ASWATHY BHAVAN, PULIYOORVANCHI SOUTH,

¶26

EDAKULANGARA BLOCK NO.II, SHOP NO.4

¶27

(SINGLE ROOM) DEVASWOM SHOPPING COMPLEX,

¶28

PUTHIYAKAVU, KARUNAGAPPALLY.

¶29

7. LAMBODHARAN PILLAI,

¶30

S/O.NARAYANA PILLAI, AGED 61,SHOP NO.4, BLOCK NO.2,

¶31

DEVASWOM SHOPPING COMPLEX, PUTHIYAKAVU, K.S.PURAM,

¶32

KARUNAGAPPALLY, RESIDING AT VAZHAPILLETHUTHEKKATHIL, KOZHIKODU MEKKU, KARUNAGAPPALLY.

2/-

sts

-2-

WP(C)NO.18028/2012

¶37

8. N.THANKAPPAN, PULLAMPLAVIL VEEDU, KADATHOOR, THAZHAVA, BLOCK NO.II,SHOP NO.5 (SINGLE ROOM) DEVASWOM

¶38

SHOPPING COMPLEX,PUTHIYAKAVU, KARUNAGAPALLY.

¶39

9. K.N.RAVEENDRAN,

¶40

ROOM NO.5, BLOCK NO.II, DEVASWOM SHOPPING COMPLEX, PUTHIYAKAVU, K.S.PURAM, KARUNAGAPPALLY, RESIDING AT RAVI MANDIRAM, EDAKULANGARA P.O., KARUNAGAPPALLY.

¶41

BY ADV. SMT.R.RANJINI

¶42

RESPONDENT(S):

¶43

1. TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, REP.BY SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶44

2. THE ASSISTANT DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, KARUNAGAPPALLY-690 518.

¶45

R1 & R2 BY ADV.SRI.G.BIJU,SC,TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD

¶46

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-08-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

sts

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶51

P1 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15/9/2006 IN DBA NO.59/06

¶52

P2 COPY OF THE LEASE DEED EXECUTED BY THE 7TH PETITIONER.

¶53

P3 COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 9/5/2012 ISSUED BY THE BOARD

¶54

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO.JUDGE

sts

THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN &

¶59

K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JJ.

¶60

W.P(C).No.18028 of 2012

¶61

Dated this the 1^st day of August, 2012

¶62

JUDGMENT

¶63

Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan,J.

¶64

Petitioners are aggrieved by the enhancement of rent for the shop-rooms of the TDB building in Puthiyakavu, Karunagappally. The increase is by 10%, stated to be annually. We are not persuaded to take the view that the enhancement now suggested is either arbitrary or harsh. At any rate, when the Devaswom Board has invested funds in shopping complexes etc., to be leased out, that is only a mode of generating income to augment for its purposes and responsibilities. It is not a social endeavor to provide rental accommodation at low rates. Under such circumstances, we do not find any ground to interfere with the fixation of 10% addition in the existing rate of rent, at least for two years. It is however clarified that before further enhancement from the financial year commencing 1.4.2014, if the petitioners make any representation on the basis of the then

¶65

WPC.18028/12

¶66

¶67

available situation, the Board authorities will give them an opportunity of hearing and decide on any such request. We clarify that we have not stated anything on that matter on merits. Subject to that, this writ petition is closed.

¶68

Sd/THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN Judge.

¶69

Sd/K.VINOD CHANDRAN Judge. kkb.3/8.

P. Ramachandran v. Travancore Devaswom Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P. Ramachandran v. Travancore Devaswom Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., Vs Vijayakumar and Others

C.K.Sarojini Vs M.P.Lakshmi

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Paul K.O. and Others

Francis Mukkanical Vs the General Manager

Suo Motu Vs Travancore Devaswom Board

Rajamony.P. Vs Travancore Devaswom Board