Disposed

T.P.Muraleedharan v. Greater Cochin Development Authority

Kerala HC24 Jan 2014WP(C)/2254/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition concerning revenue recovery for rent arrears, the High Court adjourned proceedings to allow the petitioner to file a representation to the District Collector while staying coercive action. The court ordered a final decision by on or before 28.02.2014, noting compliance of an earlier judgment.

What did the court decide?

Coercive steps pursuant to notices P1 and P2 put on hold. Petitioner to file detailed representation within two weeks. Final orders by 28.02.2014.

T.P.Muraleedharan Vs Greater Cochin Development Authority — Landlord and Tenant | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY 2014/4TH MAGHA, 1935

¶5

WP(C).No. 2254 of 2014 (F)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

T.P.MURALEEDHARAN, AGED 60 YEARS S/O. M. NARAYANA MENON, NOW RESIDING AT KIZHAKKETHALAKKAL HOUSE PEOPLES DAIRY COMPOUND, VYTTILA, KOCHI 682 019.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.P.GOPINATH SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

GREATER COCHIN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REPRESENTED BY ITS SERCRETARY GCDA OFFICE, KADAVANTHARA, KOCHI 682 020.

¶11

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM 682 030.

¶12

THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY) TALUK OFFICE, KANAYANNUR TALUK ERNAKULAM, KOCHI 682 011.

¶13

M/S. PREMIER PLANTATIONS LTD. A PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR XII/3859 A, 1ST FOLLOR, CARMEL BUILDING BANERJI ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI 682 018.

¶14

BY ADV. SRI.C.A.MAJEED, GREATER COCHIN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. RAFEEK V.K.

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24-01-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C) NO.2254/2014

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS

¶19

EXHIBIT P1 :^{TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 20.06.2013 SERVED} BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT ON THE PETITIONER.

¶20

EXHIBIT P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE FORM-10 NOTICE DATED 20.06.2013 SERVED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT ON THE PETITIONER.

¶21

EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE WRIT PETITION(C) NO. 11531/2012 WITHOUT EXHIBITS DATED 21.05.2012 FILED BY SMT. M.P. SARASWATHY BEFORE THIS HONOURABLE COURT.

¶22

EXHIBIT P4

¶23

: TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT WITHOUT EXHIBITS DATED 07.10.2013 FILED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT IN WP(C) NO. 11531/2012

¶24

EXHIBIT P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 25.10.2013 IN WP(C) NO. 11531/2012 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.

¶25

EXHIBIT P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE FORM NO. 32 FILED WITH THE REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES, SHOWING THE CESSATION OF THE MANAGING DIRECTORSHIP OF THE PETITIONER FROM THE 4TH RESPONDENT COMPANY.

¶26

RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS : NIL

¶27

/TRUE COPY/

¶28

P.A. TO JUDGE.

¶29

V. CHITAMBARESH, J

¶30

WP(C) NO. 2254 OF 2014

¶31

Dated this the 24^th day of January, 2014

¶32

JUDGMENT

¶33

The revenue recovery proceedings initiated for realisation of rent arrears due to the Greater Cochin Development Authority (GCDA) are impugned in this Writ Petition. The petitioner maintains that he has since resigned from the fourth respondent Company which alone would at best be liable to discharge the liability. The Manager of the fourth respondent Company had earlier filed WP(C) No. 11531/2012 challenging the revenue recovery proceedings initiated against her. The said Writ Petition was disposed of by Ext.P5 judgment directing the District Collector to consider the representation put in by the erstwhile manager.

¶34

It is submitted on behalf of the GCDA that the directions in Ext.P5 judgment are yet to be complied with. The interest of justice would be met by extending the time fixed in Ext.P5 judgment till 28.02.2014. The petitioner in WP(C) No. 11531/2012 and the petitioner in the present Writ Petition as

¶35

¶36

WP(C) No. 2254/2014

¶37

well as the fourth respondent Company shall be put on notice in the exercise. The fourth respondent Company is reportedly having its office at Karmel Building, Banerji Road, Ernakulam.

¶38

The petitioner shall also file a detailed representation to the District Collector within two weeks from today. The said representation coupled with the representation filed by the petitioner in WP(C) No. 11531/2012 shall be dealt with together. Final orders thereon shall be passed by the District Collector after notice to the GCDA on or before 28.02.2014. The coercive steps as against the petitioner pursuant to Exts.P1 and P2 notices shall be put on hold in the meanwhile.

¶39

The Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶40

V. CHITAMBARESH JUDGE

¶41

ncd

T.P.Muraleedharan v. Greater Cochin Development Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.P.Muraleedharan v. Greater Cochin Development Authority

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

Sajeesh Vs the Regional Transport Officer

Stephen Gomez P. Vs the Special Deputy Tahsildar (Rr)

Shiju Raj Vs the Union of India, M.G.Road Branch, Ernakulam

St. Francis Reading Association, Mattom Vs Smt. Leegi

A.P.Saduli Vs the State of Kerala

P K Sulaiman Vs the Tahsildar