SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Ker) 7

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM
Choorapilan Jameela, W/o Pookodan Subair – Appellant
Versus
Padavanna Shamseer, S/o Mohammed – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Sri. K. M. Sathyanatha Menon
For the Respondent: Sri. P. Martin Jose, Shri. Nithin George, Shri. M. V. Haridas Menon, Shri. Rithu Jose, Sri. P. Prijith, Sri.Thomas P.Kuruvilla, Sri. R. Githesh, Smt. Anna Linda Eden, Shri. Ajay Ben Jose, Sri. Manjunath Menon, Smt. Anavadya Sanil Kumar, Smt. Anjali Krishna, Sri. S. Sreekumar (Sr.), Smt. G. Sheeba, Gp

Judgement Key Points

The ratio decidendi of the judgment is that when a lease expires and the lessee ceases to have lawful possession or rights over the leased premises, they lose any legal right to continue occupation or conduct activities on the site. Consequently, the license associated with storing petroleum automatically stands canceled upon lease expiration, without the need for a formal cancellation process or opportunity for hearing. The Court emphasizes that a person’s continued possession after the expiration of a lawful lease does not constitute a lawful right to the premises, and the licensee's rights are derived solely from the lease agreement. Therefore, once the lease period lapses, the licensee's entitlement to operate or store petroleum on the premises terminates automatically, and the license can be canceled without further procedural requirements.


Table of Content
1. writ of mandamus sought for possession. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arguments on maintainability of writ petition. (Para 4 , 5)
3. court observations on lease expiration. (Para 6 , 7)
4. cancellation of licenses related to lease. (Para 10 , 11)
5. final ruling on writ relief. (Para 12 , 13)

JUDGMENT :

M. A. ABDUL HAKHIM, J.

1. Petitioners have filed this Writ petition seeking a Writ of Mandamus to the Respondents to vacate and deliver possession of the leased premises covered by Ext.P1 Registered Lease Deed dated 21.01.2004 in favour of the Respondent No.1 and seeking a Writ of Mandamus to the Respondent No.4 to cancel the Explosive License issued in favour of the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 for conducting Petroleum Retail Outlet in the leased premises to the Respondent No.1 as per Ext.P1 Lease Deed.

2. I heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioners, Sri.K.M.Sathyanatha Menon, learned Senior Counsel for the Respondent No.1, Sri. S. Sreekumar, instructed by Adv.Sri.Martin Jose P., and the learned Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 and 3, who are the Oil Marketing Company and its Chief Divisional Retail Manager, Sri.Nithin George.

3. The contention of the Counsel for the Petitioners is th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top