J.Ramkumar Vs. State of Kerala

J.Ramkumar vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jan 28, 2014

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1125645

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1125645
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Hon'Ble the Chief Justice Dr. Manjula Chellur
Decided On: Jan 28, 2014
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

J.Ramkumar

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....2 to 5.2. the main allegation of the petitioner is that, he is a tenant of the building belonging to the 6th respondent and the police is insisting the petitioner to surrender vacant possession of the building to the landlord. he had already filed two suits namely o.s.no.273 of 2012 and o.s.no.43 of 2013 before the munsiff's court, chengannur and sub court chengannur respectively. munsiff's court already ordered status quo to be maintained.3. learned counsel for the party respondent submits that he has not initiated any action against the petitioner whereas the petitioner had filed false suits and the order of status quo is not in force. w.p.(c). no.30917 of 2013 2 4. learned government pleader on instructions would submit that there exists some issues between the parties and there were allegations by the party respondent that the petitioner was focussing cctv to the party respondent's house and was causing nuisance. it is also indicated that the petitioner is storing gas cylinders in such a way that it may damage the drainage lines of the 6th respondent-landlord.5. having regard to the aforesaid circumstances, we do not think that the direction as sought for can be granted in the matter, especially in the light of pendency of civil disputes.6. learned government pleader submits that police is not interfering in the civil disputes. however, if there is any criminal act committed by any of the parties, definitely the police shall interfere in accordance with law. we make it clear that the police shall not use any force against the petitioner to evict him from the premises. with these observations, this writ petition is disposed of. manjula chellur, chief justice a.m.shaffique, judge. sj 29/1

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE DR. MANJULA CHELLUR & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE TUESDAY,THE28H DAY OF JANUARY20148TH MAGHA, 1935 WP(C).No. 30917 of 2013 (L) ---------------------------- PETITIONER : --------------------- J.RAMKUMAR, AGED39YEARS PROPRIETOR, ARYAS HOTEL, CHENGANNUR ALAPUZHA, RESIDING AT ANJILIVILAYIL HOUSE THONALLUR MURI, PANDALAM P.O., ADOOR TALUK PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.N.RADHAKRISHNAN (THIRUVALLA) RESPONDENT(S) : ---------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT TRIVANDRUM, PIN69500.

2. DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF (RURAL) ALAPPUZHA, PIN68800.

3. DEPUTY SUPRENDENT OF POLICE CHENGANNUR, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN68900.

4. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CHENGANNUR, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN68900.

5. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE CHENGANNUR POLICE STATION, CHENGANNUR ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN68900.

6. AHOKA J.JACOB, AGED37 PADIPURACKAL HOUSE, THITTAMEL MURI, CHENGANNUR P.O. ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN68900. R1 TO R5 BY SPL. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. SUJITH MATHEW JOSE R6 BY ADV. SRI.SYAM J.

SAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON2801-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 30917 of 2013 (L) ---------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS : ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT-P1: COPY OF LICENCE NO.945 DATED1207.2012 ISSUED FROM THE CHENGANNUR MUNICIPALITY. EXHIBIT-P2: COPY OF RECEIPT NO.473 DATED0212.2013 ISSUED FROM THE CHENGANNUR MUNICIPALITY. EXHIBIT-P3: PHOTOCOPY OF THE PLAINT NUMBERED AS O.S.NO.273 OF 2012 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, CHENGANNUR. EXHIBIT-P4: COPY OF JUDGMENT

IN W.P.(C) 2076/2013 DATED2301.2013. EXHIBIT-P5: PHOTOCOPY OF THE PLAINT NUMBERED AS O.S.NO.43 OF 2013 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SUB COURT, CHENGANNUR. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : -------------------------------------------- EXT.R6(a) COPY OF THE ORDER

IN IA NO. 1442/2012. EXT.R6(b) COPY OF THE AGREEMENT PRODUCED BY THE PETITIONER IN EXHIBIT P5. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn MANJULA CHELLUR C.J.

& A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C). No.30917 of 2013 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 28th day of January, 2014 JUDGMENT

Shaffique, J Petitioner who is running hotel business is before this Court seeking a direction to the police that he should not be harassed by respondents 2 to 5.

2. The main allegation of the petitioner is that, he is a tenant of the building belonging to the 6th respondent and the police is insisting the petitioner to surrender vacant possession of the building to the landlord. He had already filed two suits namely O.S.No.273 of 2012 and O.S.No.43 of 2013 before the Munsiff's Court, Chengannur and Sub Court Chengannur respectively. Munsiff's Court already ordered status quo to be maintained.

3. Learned counsel for the party respondent submits that he has not initiated any action against the petitioner whereas the petitioner had filed false suits and the order of status quo is not in force. W.P.(C). No.30917 of 2013 2 4. Learned Government Pleader on instructions would submit that there exists some issues between the parties and there were allegations by the party respondent that the petitioner was focussing CCTV to the party respondent's house and was causing nuisance. It is also indicated that the petitioner is storing gas cylinders in such a way that it may damage the drainage lines of the 6th respondent-landlord.

5. Having regard to the aforesaid circumstances, we do not think that the direction as sought for can be granted in the matter, especially in the light of pendency of civil disputes.

6. Learned Government Pleader submits that police is not interfering in the civil disputes. However, if there is any criminal act committed by any of the parties, definitely the Police shall interfere in accordance with law. We make it clear that the Police shall not use any force against the petitioner to evict him from the premises. With these observations, this writ petition is disposed of. MANJULA CHELLUR, CHIEF JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE. sj 29/1

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2014 Same Parties J.Ramkumar vs State of Kerala Same Subject Education Same Judge Hon'Ble the Chief Justice Dr. Manjula Chellur