K. VINOD CHANDRAN, C. JAYACHANDRAN
Santhosh Kumar Nair, S/o. Gopalan Nair – Appellant
Versus
Suresh P. Sreedharan, S/o. Sreedharan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
C. Jayachandran, J.
The 5th respondent in W.P.(C) No.21186/2022 - petitioner's landlord - is the appellant herein. The judgment in the above writ petition dated 8.8.2022 is impugned in this appeal, which directed the Station House Officer concerned (3rd respondent in the writ petition) to afford adequate police protection to the petitioner as regards his life and property. The judgment also directed the 4th respondent (The Corporation, Thrissur) not to cancel Ext.P2 license for conducting a restaurant, without notice to the petitioner and hearing him.
2. Facts in brief:-
The parties are referred to from their original status in the Writ Petition. The petitioner is conducting a restaurant in building no.39/1687/1 taken on rent from the 5th respondent/landlord. Ext.P1 dated 31.8.2021 is the consent issued by the 5th respondent before the 4th respondent Corporation, enabling the petitioner to conduct the restaurant. The petitioner is possessed of Ext.P2 license issued by the Corporation and Ext.P3 consent to operate issued by the Kerala State Pollution Control Board. The restaurant was inaugurated on 08.05.2022, as evidenced by Exts.P4 and P4(a) photographs. From 05.06.2022 onw
Central Bank of India and Another vs. Beena Thiruvenkitam
K.S. Rashid and son v. The Income Tax Investigation Commission
DLF Housing v. Delhi Municipal Corporation
Union of India v. Ghaus Muhammed
Hindustan Steel Works Construction Ltd. v. Hindustan Steel Works Construction Ltd. Employees Union
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.