P.B.SURESH KUMAR, C.S.SUDHA
S. K. Pavithran – Appellant
Versus
Laisy Santhosh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
P.B. Suresh Kumar, J.
These appeals are directed against the common judgment dated 14.02.2020 in W.P.(C) Nos.29704 of 2015 and 2213 of 2018. The appellants in the appeals are respondents 4 to 6 in W.P.(C) No.29704 of 2015 and petitioners in W.P.(C) No.2213 of 2018. Parties and documents are referred to in this judgment for convenience, as they appear in W.P.(C) No.29704 of 2015.
2. The petitioner is a person residing at Vaikom in a residential property owned by her. A toddy shop under the Vaikom Excise Range is located in the property adjacent to the residential property of the petitioner. Respondents 4 to 6 are the licencees of the said toddy shop. According to the petitioner, since the functioning of the toddy shop has been causing nuisance to her and family, she preferred a complaint to the first respondent, the Excise Commissioner, seeking orders to change its location. Though it was found that the toddy shop has been functioning in the same location and premises right from 1994-95 in accordance with the Rules framed under the Abkari Act and that the petitioner is a person who started residing in the adjacent property after the establishment of the toddy shop, the first
K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India
K.S.Puttaswamy and another (Aadhaar) v. Union of India and another
Kharak Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Khoday Distilleries Ltd. and others v. State of Karnataka and others
Krishnan Kakkanth v. Government of Kerala and others
Nashirwar and others v. State of Madhya Pradesh and others
Olga Tellis and others v. Bombay Municipal Corporation and others
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.