Binith M.R., vs the Secretary,

Binith M.R., vs The Secretary,

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Mar 14, 2025

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1277258

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/1277258
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice Ziyad Rahman a.a.
Decided On: Mar 14, 2025
Case Number: WP(C)/2636/2025
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Binith M.R.,

Respondent

The Secretary,

Excerpt

.....to take any action including the revision of ext.p11.3. it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he had already withdrawn the said appeal on 28.01.2025. the learned counsel for the petitioner made available the copy of the order passed by the tribunal for local self government institution on 28.01.2025 in appeal no.299/2023, wherein, the appeal is dismissed as not pressed.4. thus it is evident from the records that, the only legal impediment highlighted in ext.p15 for reconsidering ext.p11 demand i.e., the pendency of the appeal, is not longer in existence. in such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of, directing the 1st respondent to reconsider and reassess the arrears of rent allegedly payable by the petitioner and issue afresh demand to the petitioner. the learned counsel for the petitioner also points out that the petitioner is having certain disputes with regard to the measurement of the building as well. therefore, it is ordered that while revising the demand made in ext.p11, the grievances of the petitioner with regard to the measurement of the plinth area of the building shall also be taken into account, after giving the petitioner an opportunity to be heard. necessary orders shall be passed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.sd/- ziyad rahman a.a. judge rpk appendix of wp(c) 2636/2025 petitioner exhibits exhibit p1 a true copy of the fl 11 license of the petitioner dated 01.04.2022 exhibit p2 a true copy of the license issued by the 1st respondent dated 26.07.2022 exhibit p3 a true copy of the application for renewal of license dated 08.02.2023 exhibit p4 a true copy of the letter issued by the 1st respondent dated 08.02.2023 exhibit p5 a true copy of the letter dated 19.03.2018 issued by the chairperson of the 1st respondent municipality exhibit p6 a true copy of the receipt evidencing payment of rent dated 07.06.2022 exhibit p7 a true copy of the receipt evidencing.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. TH FRIDAY, THE 14 DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 23RD PHALGUNA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 2636 OF 2025 PETITIONER/S: BINITH M.R., MANAGING PARTNER HOTEL RAJADHANI, XVII/645, MUNICIPAL BUS STAND BUILDING, POST OFFICE ROAD KOTTAYAM RESIDING AT FLAT NO 2A SFS KINGDOM, NEAR CHOICE SCHOOL THRIPUNITHARA, PIN - 682301 BY ADVS. S.KRISHNA GOVIND R. RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE SECRETARY, KOTTAYAM MUNICIPALITY MUNICIPAL OFFICE BUILDING, YMCA RD, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686001 2 THE DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPALITIES SWARAJ BHAVAN, NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695003 3 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPALITIES SWARAJ BHAVAN, NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695003

BY ADV GOVERNMENT PLEADER OTHER PRESENT: Smt.Deepa.V, G.P, Shri. Ajith Joy, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P11 notice issued by the 1st respondent, wherein an amount of Rs.8,08,131/- is demanded, as the arrears of the rent payable in respect of the building occupied by the petitioner. The specific case of the petitioner is that there are serious mistakes in the calculation of the amount mentioned therein, in terms of the area for which the rent is demanded and also the rates applied for the same. The writ petition is submitted in such circumstances.

2. In response to Ext.P14 submitted by the petitioner

highlighting the mistakes in the calculation, Ext.P15 communication was issued by the 1st respondent, admitting that there occurred certain mistakes in calculating the amount shown in Ext.P11. However, according to the said respondent, as a challenge against the demand notice is pending consideration before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institution, they are unable to take any action including the revision of Ext.P11.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he had already withdrawn the said appeal on 28.01.2025. The learned counsel for the petitioner made available the copy of the order passed by the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institution on 28.01.2025 in Appeal No.299/2023, wherein, the appeal is dismissed as not pressed.

4. Thus it is evident from the records that, the only legal impediment highlighted in Ext.P15 for reconsidering Ext.P11 demand i.e., the pendency of the appeal, is not longer in existence. In such circumstances, This writ petition is disposed of, directing the 1st respondent to reconsider and reassess the arrears of rent allegedly payable by the petitioner and issue a

fresh demand to the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner also points out that the petitioner is having certain disputes with regard to the measurement of the building as well. Therefore, it is ordered that while revising the demand made in Ext.P11, the grievances of the petitioner with regard to the measurement of the plinth area of the building shall also be taken into account, after giving the petitioner an opportunity to be heard. Necessary orders shall be passed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE rpk APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2636/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FL 11 LICENSE OF THE PETITIONER DATED 01.04.2022 Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 26.07.2022 Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF LICENSE DATED 08.02.2023 Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 08.02.2023 Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 19.03.2018 ISSUED BY THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT MUNICIPALITY Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT EVIDENCING PAYMENT OF RENT DATED 07.06.2022 Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT EVIDENCING PAYMENT OF RENT DATED 07.07.2022 Exhibit P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT EVIDENCING PAYMENT OF RENT DATED 27.08.2022 Exhibit P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO 38617 OF 2022 DATED 30.11.2022 Exhibit P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 02.03.2023 Exhibit P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 14.03.2023 Exhibit P12 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLETION PLAN OF THE BUILDING Exhibit P13 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 23.12.2024 Exhibit P14 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 23.12.2024 Exhibit P15 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 13.12.2024

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2025 Same Parties Binith M.R., vs The Secretary, Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice Ziyad Rahman a.a.