Dismissed

T.M Sebastian v. the Excise Commissioner

Kerala HC18 Jan 2023WP(C)/1555/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a landlord, filed a writ petition for liquidated damages after his lease to an alcohol outlet was terminated due to court directions on parking nuisance. The Court dismissed the petition, holding the landlord should claim damages in a civil suit, not via writ.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed. Observations made that landlord should claim liquidated damages through civil suit not via writ.

T.M Sebastian Vs the Excise Commissioner — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 28TH POUSHA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 1555 OF 2023

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

T.M SEBASTIAN,
AGED 75 YEARS,
S/O., LATE MATHEW,
THAYYIL HOUSE, VELLAPPAD, PALA P.O.,
KOTTAYAM , PIN – 686575

¶8

BY ADVS.
ARUN CHANDRAN
THOMAS J.ANAKKALLUNKAL
ANJALY T.A

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER,
EXCISE COMMISSIONERATE,
VIKAS BHAVAN P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM , PIN – 695033

¶11

2 THE SOUTHERN REGIONAL JOINT EXCISE COMMISSIONER, EXCISE HEADQUARTER, NANDAVANAM, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695033

¶12

3 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, EXCISE DIVISION OFFICE, COLLECTORATE P.O., KOTTAYAM , PIN – 686002

¶13

4 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT POLICE OFFICE, COLLECTORATE P.O., KOTTAYAM. PIN – 686002

¶14

5 THE KERALA STATE BEVERAGES CORPORATION LIMITED, BEVCO TOWER,PALAYAM, VIKAS BHAVAN PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PIN – 695033 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. BY ADV. SRI.JUSTIN JACOB, SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶15

WP(C) NO. 1555 OF 2023 -2-

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 18.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C) NO. 1555 OF 2023 -3-

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

Petitioner is the owner of building No.77-6 and 77-7 located within ward No.24 of Pala Municipality measuring an area of 4066 Sq.ft. The said building was leased out to the Kerala State Beverages Corporation Limited in the year 2018 to operate FL-1/5026 premium liquor outlet. It was renewed for another period from 06.03.2021 to 05.03.2024. On filing of the writ petition bearing No.24764 of 2022 alleging that the unauthorized parking causes traffic congestion, this Court vide order dated 02.08.2022, relying upon the judgment reported in 2017 (3) KHC 717 My Hindustan Paints, Thrissur and Others v. State of Kerala and Others, held that there should not be any nuisance caused to the affected parties in the area on account of the operation of the outlet including the formation of the queu es and disposed of the writ petition for complying with the directions contained therein within a period of one month. It is contended that on account of that, the

¶20

WP(C) NO. 1555 OF 2023 -4-

¶21

business outlet is being relocated and petitioner is seriously prejudiced.

¶22

I am afraid this Court cannot entertain this writ petition at the instance of the landlord as the landlord had entered into a lease agreement dated 09.11.2021 for the period from 06.03.2021 to 5.3.2024 containin g certain terms and conditions, at the best in view of the direction of this Court, is liable to claim liquidate damages in terms of money but not through present writ petition.

¶23

Writ petition is dismissed with the aforementioned observations.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

AMIT RAWAL JUDGE

¶26

vv

¶27

WP(C) NO. 1555 OF 2023 -5-

¶28

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1555/2023

¶29

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶30

EXHIBIT - P1A TRUE COPY OF THE LEASE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE 5TH
RESPONDENT DATED 12.12.2021
EXHIBIT - P2A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT RENDERED
IN W.P.(C) NO. 24764 OF 2022 ON
02.08.2022

¶31

EXHIBIT - P3A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING
(EXC/3533/2022-XC1) ISSUED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED
07.01.2023 ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH
TRANSLATION

¶32

EXHIBIT - P4PHOTOGRAPHS EVIDENCING THE PARKING
FACILITIES ATTACHED TO THE BUILDING IN
THE QUESTION

¶33

EXHIBIT - P5A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY
THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 5TH
RESPONDENT DATED 10.01.2023 ALONG WITH
ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION

¶34

EXHIBIT - P6A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY
THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
DATED 11.01.2023 ALONG WITH ITS
ENGLISH TRANSLATION

T.M Sebastian v. the Excise Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.M Sebastian v. the Excise Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suja Roay, Vs Deputy Labour Officer

Radha Natarajan Vs State of Kerala

Sameerbabu P.V. Vs the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority

Dr. Chitra Raghavan Vs the Controlling Authority Under the Payment of Gratuity Act

Arakkanattil Oommen Iype Represented by Power of Attorney Holder Suja Mathew George Vs State of Kerala Represented by the Secretary

Abdul Azeez Vs the Secretary