Disposed

Jayashree Rameshkumar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC16 Feb 2024WP(C)/2436/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A landlord sought payment of enhanced rent and arrears from the State and a State welfare corporation leasing her building. The court directed the Public Works Department authority to value the property within one month, then the Social Justice Principal Secretary to fix rent and arrears within two months of the report, with respondent 3 to discharge liability within one month thereafter.

What the court decided

AI extract

Jayashree Rameshkumar Vs State of Kerala — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 16^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 27TH MAGHA, 1945

¶4

W.P.(C) NO.2436 OF 2024

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

JAYASHREE RAMESHKUMAR, AGED 61 YEARS, W/O. M. RAMESHKUMAR, R/O 309, SHALAKA, 9TH FLOOR, OPP. COOPERAGE GROUND, KARVE ROAD, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI, PIN-40002.

¶7

BY ADVS. B.G.HARINDRANATH AMITH KRISHNAN H. LEJO JOSEPH GEORGE SAIRA PUTHIYAPARAMPATH GOWRI DEV

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.

¶10

2 THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, SOCIAL JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.

¶11

3 KERALA STATE HANDICAPPED PERSON'S WELFARE CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 012.

¶12

ADDL.R4 KERALA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT REPRESENTED BY IT SECRETARY, LMS VELLAYAMBALAM ROAD, MUSEUM.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN-695 033

¶13

*** ADDL.R4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 01.02.2024 IN I.A.1/24 IN WP(C)2436/2024.**

¶14

SRI. SUNIL KUMAR KURIAKOSE, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

-2-

¶17

W.P.(C) NO.2436 OF 2024

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

Dated this the 16^th day of February, 2024

¶20

The petitioner says that he has leased out a property to the 3^rd respondent, as evident from Ext.P1; and that though they had resolved to enhance the rent and pay the arrears to him, it has not been done, presumably because, respondents 1 and 2 have not taken further action on such. He thus prays that respondents 1 and 2 be directed to pay the enhanced rent, along with arrears, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court; further praying that Exts.P10 and P12 be quashed, to the extent to which the 3^rd respondent has shied away from their responsibility to honour the said claim and has put it exclusively on respondents 1 and 2.

¶21

Sri. B.G. Harindranath – learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that his client has now been pushed to a corner because, though she is the landlord, she has been denied eligible rent, solely because the 3^rd respondent says that have no financial resources to honour her claim, which, in fact, they have acceded to. He argued that his client is, therefore, fully justified in having approached this Court; and prayed that the reliefs sought for in this writ petition be granted.

¶22

-3-

¶23

W.P.(C) NO.2436 OF 2024

¶24

Pertinently, the learned Government Pleader -

¶25

Sri. Sunil Kumar Kuriakose, submitted that the only practical issue which impedes respondents 1 and 2 from acceding to the recommendations of the 3^rd respondent on the claim of the petitioner, is that the building has not been yet properly valued by the competent Authority. He submitted that, since the petitioner has now arrayed the 4^th respondent – Kerala Public Works Department, in the party array as an additional respondent, its competent Authority can evaluate the same; and that, on receipt of their report, the 2^nd respondent will advert to the recommendations of the 3^rd respondent and acceded to, to the extent permissible. He, therefore, prayed that this writ petition be ordered only on such terms.

¶26

Sri. B.G. Harindranath - the learned counsel for the petitioner acceded to the afore suggestions.

¶27

In the above circumstances, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions:-

¶28

(a) The competent Authority of the 4^th respondent Public Works Department – which the learned Government Pleader says is the Assistant Executive Engineer, Thiruvananthapuram - will evaluate the rental value and worth of the building in question and file a report before the

¶29

-4-

¶30

W.P.(C) NO.2436 OF 2024

¶31

2^nd respondent, with a copy to the petitioner, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶32

(b) On the afore report being received by the 2^nd respondent, it will immediately advert to the recommendations made by the 3^rd respondent through Exts.P10 and P12; and take a final decision as to the rent to be fixed in favour of the petitioner, as also the arrears of rent that becomes so eligible. A final decision in this regard shall be communicated to the 3^rd respondent by the 2^nd respondent within a period of two months from the date on which it receives a report in terms of direction No.(a) above.

¶33

(c) On the 3^rd respondent receiving the recommendations/proceedings from the 2^nd respondent in terms of the directions above, it will proceed to discharge the liability to the petitioner, including the arrears of rent, within a period of one month thereafter. Necessary resources for this shall be ensured to be forwarded to the 3^rd respondent by respondents 1 and 2 appropriately.

¶34

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE

¶35

bpr

¶36

-5-

¶37

W.P.(C) NO.2436 OF 2024

¶38

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2436/2024

¶39

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶40

Exhibit P1	A TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT FOR LEASE DATED 01.02.2000 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P2	A TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE ORDER NO. 5611/2021/MRST/HWC DATED 04.12.2012 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT ENHANCING THE MONTHLY RENT OF THE TENANTED PREMISES TO RS.6,000/-
Exhibit P3	A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF TERMINATION DATED 21.11.2016 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P4	A TRUE COPY OF ONE SUCH REMINDER SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON 30.10.2018 THROUGH REGISTERED POST
Exhibit P5	A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.183/A2/19/HWC DATED 22.04.2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
Exhibit P6	A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY LETTER ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT THROUGH REGISTERED POST ON 16.05.2019
Exhibit P7	A TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 29.01.2021 BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND REPRESENTATIVES OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P8	A TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF 205TH BOARD MEETING OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT HELD ON 17.04.2021

¶41

-6-

¶42

W.P.(C) NO.2436 OF 2024

¶43

Exhibit P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION NO.285/MRST/2014/HWC DATED 14.05.2021 Exhibit P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.385/MRST/2021/KSHPWC DATED 12.05.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2 RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 27.05.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER Exhibit P12 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO. 385/MRST/2021/ KSHPWC DATED 17.06.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P13 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 25.07.2022

Jayashree Rameshkumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Jayashree Rameshkumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Muhammed Raseel M.K Vs Union of India

Dipu K Joseph Vs Hdfc Bank Ltd.

Jobin Joseph Vs Federal Bank

Sukesini Constructions and Developers (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Kerala

George C Koottiyani Vs State of Kerala

Salish Sham Viswan Vs Singing Artists Association Kerala