Dismissed

Tresa Antony v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Jan 2018WP(C)/38795/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the eviction order against a tenant pending a civil suit for temporary injunction, quashed the eviction notice, and directed the authority to decide on an internal works representation within a month.

What did the court decide?

Ext.P8 (eviction notice) was quashed. The second respondent was directed to consider the representation (Ext.P2) and take a decision within a month.

Tresa Antony Vs the State of Kerala — Landlord and Tenant | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

MONDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY 2018 / 18TH POUSHA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 38795 of 2017

¶6

PETITIONER

¶7

TRESA ANTONY., AGED 54 YEARS, W/O.SAJEEV XAVIER ANTONY, SKYLINE-5, ELYSIUM GARDENS, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU INTERNATIONAL STADIUM ROAD, KALOOR, KOCHI- 682 017.

¶8

BY ADV.SMT.K.L.LAKSHMI RANI

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, STATE SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695001.

¶11

2. THE GREATER COCHIN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.B. NO 2012, KADVANATHRA, COCHIN-682 020.

¶12

3. THE SECRETARY THE GREATER COCHIN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, P.B. NO.2012, KADVANATHRA, COCHIN- 682 020.

¶13

R1 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. SURIN GEORGE IYPE R2,R3 BY ADVS. SRI.V.J.MATHEW (SR.)

¶14

SRI.K.NARAYANAN, SC, SRI.VIPIN P.VARGHESE, SC,

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-01-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

sdr/-

¶17

WP(C).No. 38795 of 2017 (Y)

¶18

APPENDIX --------

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' --------------	EXHIBITS ---------
EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE EXECUTED BETWEEN SECRETARY OF GCDA	LEASE DEED DATED 19.5.2014 THE PETITIONER AND THE .
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE SUBMITTED BY THE	APPLICATION DATED 30.6.2017 PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE THE 2ND ADDITIONA DATED 20.3.2017	PLAINT IN OS NO.357/2017 BEFORE L MUNSIFF'S COURT, ERNAKULAM
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE NO.2302/2017 IN O FILES OF THE 2ND ERNAKULAM.	ORDER INJUNCTION IN IA S NO 357/2017 DATED 27.6.2017 ON THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF'S COURT,
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE NO.29275/2017	ORDER DATED 19.9.2017 IN WPC
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF ORDE 8.11.2017 IN WPC	R OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED NO.29275/2017
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF THE	NOTICE DATED 25.8.2017
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF THE	ORDER DATED 26.10.2017
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY OF THE	RECEIPTS DATED 20.7.2017, 3.8.2017.
EXHIBIT P10	TRUE COPY OF THE ROOM BEARING NO.	PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE FLOOR OF THE SHOP B 1107

¶20

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS NIL -------------------/TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE

¶21

sdr/-

¶22

SHAJI P. CHALY, J.

¶23

W.P.(C) No.38795 of 2017

¶24

Dated this the 8^th day of January, 2018

¶25

JUDGMENT

¶26

This writ petition is field by the petitioner, who is a

¶27

tenant under the second respondent seeking to quash Ext.P8,

¶28

whereby, the petitioner is directed to surrender the shop

¶29

premises in question having No.B-1106 and 1107 situate in

¶30

the Jawaharlal Nehru International Stadium, Kaloor within 30

¶31

days from the date of receipt of the notice. Apparently, apprehending forcible eviction petitioner has filed a suit

¶32

before the trial court, evident from Ext.P3, and has secured an

¶33

order of temporary injunction, evident from Ext.P4, against

¶34

forcible eviction of the petitioner from and causing any

¶35

disturbance against the use of common area or for

¶36

committing any act obstructing the petitioner from carrying

¶37

W.P.(C) No.38795 of 2017

¶38

¶39

out her business, until further orders. In view of the pendency

¶40

of the above suit proceedings, action initiated by the second respondent pursuant to Ext.P8, cannot be sustained under law , therefore, I quash Ext.P8 and leave open the liberty of the

¶41

parties to contest the proceedings in the suit, in accordance with law.

¶42

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, petitioner has submitted Ext.P2 representation before the

¶43

Greater Cochin Development Authority, which is pending

¶44

consideration seeking permission to carry out internal works

¶45

of the building in question.

¶46

The second respondent is directed to consider Ext.P2 in accordance with law, and take a decision at the

¶47

earliest possible time, and at any rate, within a month from the

¶48

date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶49

W.P.(C) No.38795 of 2017

¶50

¶51

I also make it clear that all question of facts and law

¶52

raised in the writ petition are left open.

¶53

Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶54

Sd/-

¶55

SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE

¶56

dlk/8/1/

Tresa Antony v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tresa Antony v. the State of Kerala

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

Kavya Vijay (Minor) Vs State of Kerala

Devika Suresh Vs General Convener, Kerala State School Kalolsavam

Anna Jomy Vs State Level School Kalotsavam 2017-18 Committee

M/S. Ravenbeck Securities (India) Ltd. Vs the General Manager

A.Shajahan Vs Hemachandran

Adv. Peter M. Paul Vs Mr. P. Sureshkumar