JUDGMENT

The petitioners herein are partners of the firm ‘M/s Montenero TVM’ and they contend that they are engaged in running of hotels and restaurants. On the strength of Ext.P1 lease deed, they took on lease, premises owned by the 4th respondent firm, the Managing partner of which is the 3rd respondent. Shortly thereafter, disputes cropped up between the landlord and tenant. The petitioners contend that they approached the Tahsildar, Thiruvananthapuram, who is the Accommodation Controller, and filed a complaint stating that the 3rd respondent has cut off their amenities. A report was called for from the Village Officer and on the strength of Ext.P2 report, Ext.P3 order was passed by the Tahsildar directing the respondents 3 and 4 to refrain from causing any hindrance and further to restore the water, electric and sewage connection. Aggrieved by the above, the 3rd respondent started to interfere with the running of the business. It is contended that despite the orders passed by the Tahsildar, the respondents 3 and 4 are obstructing the petitioners in running the restaurant. They approached the 1st respondent and filed Ext.P4 which was followed up with Ext.P5 before the 2nd respond