Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
K. MADHUSOODANAN NAIR – Appellant
Versus
CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner claims license renewal and challenges eviction. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments presented by both parties; rental history emphasized. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court states application for renewal shouldn't require landlord's consent. (Para 5) |
| 4. court directs the renewal process, leaving eviction options open. (Para 6) |
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed with following prayers:
i. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 1st respondent to renew petitioner’s licence for the year 2025-2026 and continue to renew for subsequent years also, without the demanding consent from the 3rd respondent, irrespective of the pendency of Ext.P10 petition.
ii. dispense with filing of the English translation of vernacular documents.
iii. such other appropriate writ order or direction as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper to meet the ends of Justice.
(SIC)
2. According to the petitioner, he is conducting a business in a building bearing Nos.TC 28/922 & 923 from 1977 onwards, on the basis of Ext.P1 rent deed executed by the then owner of the building. The petitioner obtained Ext.P9 licence to conduct business for the year 1978-79 and th
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
