Allowed

Neo Sinmar Developers Pvt. Ltd., v. Jewel Homes Pvt. Ltd.

Kerala HC15 Mar 2021WA/1487/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ appeal filed by police officers challenging a single judge's direction granting them a request to provide police protection to complete apartment complex construction. The bench allowed the appeal based on submissions by petitioners showing lack of intention to construct with police protection, consequently dismissing the underlying writ petition.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal was allowed and the underlying writ petition (W.P.(C)No.17477 of 2020) was dismissed.

Neo Sinmar Developers Pvt. Ltd., Vs Jewel Homes Pvt. Ltd. — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN

¶6

MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 24TH PHALGUNA, 1942

¶7

WA.No.1487 OF 2020

¶8

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 16.10.2020 IN WP(C) 17477/2020(H) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶9

APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 5 AND 6:

¶10

1 M/S.NEO SINMAR DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR.NOBLE NJALIYATH, 56/98, 10B CROSS ROAD, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI- 682 036.

¶11

2 NOBLE NJALIYATH MANAGER DIRECTOR, NEO SINMAR DEVELOPERS PVT.LTD., 56/98, 10B CROSS ROAD, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI - 682 036.

¶12

BY ADVS. SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE SMT.ACHU SUBHA ABRAHAM SMT.V.T.LITHA SMT.K.R.MONISHA SMT.SHRUTHI SARA JACOB

W.A.No.1487 of 2020

RESPONDENTS:

1 JEWEL HOMES PVT. LTD., CASAGRANTE BUILDING, OPPOSITE TVS SHOWROOM, DESHABHIMANI, KOCHI- 682 017, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR.JIHAS P.A., AGED 51, S/O.P.K.ABDUL RAHMAN, JEWEL NEST, EROOR VASUDEVA ROAD, VASANTH NAGAR, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI- 682 025. 2 MR.JIHAS .P.A.,AGED 51 YEARS S/O. P.K.ABDUL RAHMAN, THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, JEWEL HOMES PVT LTD., EROOR VASUDEVA ROAD, VASANTH NAGAR, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI-682 025. 3 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, ERNAKULAM 682 011. 4 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, THRIKKAKKARA, ERNAKULAM 682 021. 5 INSPECTOR OF POLICE OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KALAMASSERRY, ERNAKULAM 682 022. 6 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KALAMASSERRY POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM 682 033. R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.K.R.VINOD R1-2 BY ADV.SRI.JIBU T S R1-2 BY ADV. SMT.M.S.LETHA R1-2 BY ADV. KUM.K.S.SREEREKHA R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.NABIL KHADER R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN R3-6 BY G.P.SRI.RENIL ANTO KANDAMKULATHI(SR)

¶17

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.A.No.1487 of 2020

JUDGMENT

Ravikumar, J.

This appeal is filed against the judgment in W.P. (C)No.17477/2020. Respondents 5 and 6 in the writ petition are the appellants. The said writ petition was filed by respondents 1 and 2 in this appeal seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 to 4 to provide adequate and necessary police protection to them and their employees for completing the construction of an apartment building complex namely; ' Jewel Pristine Greens' , in the landed property owned by the 2^nd petitioner, without being threatened or obstructed by the 6^th respondent and his goondas. After considering the rival contentions the learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition on the following lines:-

¶23

“Having considered the submission made by the learned counsel on both sides, this Court finds that there are certain disputes between the petitioners and the 5^th respondent, in connection with construction of an apartment complex in the property in question. In case of any threat or obstruction from the side of the 6^th respondent Inspector of Police, Kalamassery Police Station, with a request for police protection for completing the construction of the building in question, in which event, the said respondent shall do the needful, taking note of the law laid down in the decisions referred to supra.”

¶24

W.A.No.1487 of 2020

¶25

¶26

It is feeling aggrieved by the said direction that the captioned appeal has been filed under Section 5 of the High Court Act by respondents 5 and 6 therein.

¶27

When this matter is taken up for consideration Adv.Sri.Jibu.T.S., representing the learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2 herein viz., the writ petitioners, submitted that the appeal can be allowed in view of the subsequent developments. Submissions would reveal the absence of intention on the part of the said respondents viz., the writ petitioners to cause construction with police protection.

¶28

In the light of the aforesaid submission made on behalf of the contesting respondents viz., the writ petitioners we do not think it necessary to delve into the contentions in the appeal any further. Hence, recording the said submission the writ appeal is allowed. Consequently, W.P.(C)No.17477 of 2020 stands dismissed.

¶29

Sd/-

¶30

C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN Judge

¶33

TKS

Neo Sinmar Developers Pvt. Ltd., v. Jewel Homes Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neo Sinmar Developers Pvt. Ltd., v. Jewel Homes Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suo Motu Vs the Travancore Devaswom Board

G.Ravindranath Vs Travancore Devaswom Board

Kamoth Devaswom Vs Cochin Devaswom Board

V.B.Sidil Kumar Vs the Travancore Devaswom Board

Kodungallur Bhagavati Velichappadu Sangam Vs Cochin Devaswom Board

Travancore Devaswom Board Vs Deputy Examiner for Local Fund Audit