Disposed

Santhosh.v.P v. Kerala State Film Development Corporation

Kerala HC10 Dec 2014WP(C)/11412/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought specific performance of an agreement to purchase shop rooms from the first respondent through the second respondent. After noting the petitioner filed an original suit for specific performance/refund, the Court held that the civil court is the appropriate forum and disposed of the writ petition leaving issues open for that court.

What the court decided

AI extract

Santhosh.v.P Vs Kerala State Film Development Corporation — Specific Performance | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2014/19TH AGRAHAYANA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 11412 of 2012 (B)

¶6

PETITIONER(S) :

¶7

SANTHOSH.V.P, AGED 35 YEARS, VIRUTHYPARAMBIL HOUSE, PADI (P.O), EAST KODALY, VELIKULANGARA VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SRI.PRABHAKARAN, AGED 67 YEARS, S/O.KOCHAKAN, VIRUTHYPARAMBIL HOUSE, PADI (P.O), EAST KODALY, VELIKULANGARA VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.P.SANJAY

¶9

SMT.A.PARVATHI MENON SMT.M.VANAJA

¶10

RESPONDENT(S) :

¶11

1. KERALA STATE FILM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, CHALACHITRA KALABHAVAN, VAZHUTHACAUD, TRIVANDRUM, PIN-695 014, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,

¶12

2. MRS. VIJAYALAKSHMI SUSHIL, W/O.SUSHIL KUMAR, MARATT HOUSE, KUTTATHU LANE, KOORKENCHERY, THRISSUR-680 018.

¶13

R1 BY ADV. SRI.A.SUDHI VASUDEVAN, SC, KSFDC R2 BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.SURESH KUMAR (SENIOR ADVOCATE) SRI.ARUN MATHEW VADAKKAN

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10-12-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Msd.

¶16

WP(C).No. 11412 of 2012 (B)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶19

-------------------------------------

¶20

EXHIBIT P1:	TRUE COPY OF THE LEASE AGREEMENT DATED 01.02.2001.
EXHIBIT P2:	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 16.02.2001.
EXHIBIT P3:	TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 30.09.2009.
EXHIBIT P4:	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.17595/2010 DATED 08.07.2010.
EXHIBIT P5:	TRUE COPY OF THE I.A.NO.11219/2010 DATED 09.08.2010.
EXHIBIT P6:	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.NO.11219/2010 IN W.P.(C).NO.17595/2010 DATED 31.08.2010.
EXHIBIT P7:	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.A.1516/2010 DATED 28.11.2011.
EXHIBIT P8:	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.A.NO.1538/2010 DATED 28.11.2011.
EXHIBIT P9:	TRUE COPY OF THE LEGAL NOTICE TO THE 1ST AND 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 23.04.2012.
EXHIBIT P10:	TRUE COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED 30.04.2012.
EXHIBIT P11:	TRUE COPY OF THE DRAFT SALE DEED IN FAVOUR OF PETITIONER FORWARDED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED MARCH 2012.
EXHIBIT P12:	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.26/T1/2005/KSFDC OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 01.03.2012.
EXHIBIT P13:	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 11.5.2012.
EXHIBIT P14:	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 09.03.2012.

¶21

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

¶22

EXHIBIT R1(A): TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.09.2012 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN SLP NO.10738/2012.

//TRUE COPY//

P.A.TO JUDGE.

Msd.

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

¶27

*****************************************************

¶28

W.P.(C) No.11412 of 2012

¶29

*****************************************************

¶30

Dated this the 10^th day of December, 2014

¶31

JUDGMENT

¶32

The petitioner entered into a contract with the second respondent to purchase two shop rooms. Admittedly, these two shop rooms belong to the first respondent-Kerala State Film Development Corporation. The second respondent on account of the contract entered between the first respondent approached this Court in W.P.(C) No.17595 of 2010. This Court directed the first respondent to execute necessary conveyance in favour of the second respondent. Thereafter, the second respondent filed an I.A to clarify the order seeking a direction to execute the conveyance in favour of the nominee. The name of the petitioner was shown as nominee. The judgment was carried in appeal before the Division Bench. The Division Bench affirmed the decision of the single Judge. Thereafter, aggrieved by the judgment of the Division Bench,

¶33

W.P.(C) No.11412 of 2012 2

¶34

the first respondent Corporation approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the first and second respondents reached settlement. Accordingly, Ext.R1(a) order was passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The petitioner also filed review petition. The review petition was also dismissed. It is submitted by the petitioner that he has approached the Principal Sub Court, Thrissur in O.S.No.1542/2012 seeking specific performance and alternatively for refund of the amount. The petitioner seeks a direction to the first respondent to execute the sale deed based on the agreement entered into between the petitioner and the second respondent. The petitioner has alternate remedy and the petitioner has already availed alternate remedy. Therefore, leaving open all issues in the writ petition to be decided by the civil court, this writ petition is disposed of.

¶35

This writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶36

Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE

¶37

Santhosh.v.P v. Kerala State Film Development Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Santhosh.v.P v. Kerala State Film Development Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

O.Smitha Vs Thampu Cherian

Aby David Vs Padmini M.R

The Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Vs State of Kerala

Aliamma S. Mosby Vs Skariyah Philip

Star Tile Works, Kozhikode Vs District Collector, Kozhikode

Jofi Joseph Vs State of Kerala