Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

KERALA HOTEL AND RESTAURANT ASSOCIATION versus THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


KERALA HOTEL AND RESTAURANT ASSOCIATION v. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM - WP(C) No. 15055 of 2007(P) [2007] RD-KL 9469 (5 June 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 15055 of 2007(P)

1. KERALA HOTEL AND RESTAURANT ASSOCIATION,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM.
... Respondent

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

3. THE SECRETARY, ARPOOKKARA GRAMA

4. K.K.VIJAYAN, S/O.KUTTAN,

5. E.K.SUKUMARAN, PUNNAMATTATHIL HOUSE,

6. ULAHANNAN JOSEPH, THOPPIL HOUSE,

7. K.J.THOMAS, INJIPARAMBIL HOUSE,

For Petitioner :SRI.MANOJ P.KUNJACHAN

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.H.L.DATTU The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

Dated :05/06/2007

O R D E R

H.L.DATTU, C.J. & K.T.SANKARAN,J.

W.P.(C) NO. 15055 OF 2007

Dated this the 5th June, 2007



JUDGMENT

H.L.DATTU, C.J. Petitioner is an association. The members of the association are owners of hotels and restaurants at Gandhi Nagar in Kottayam District.

2. They are before this Court: (1) for a direction to respondents 1 to 3 to take appropriate action to stop the so called illegal and unauthorised functioning of the "thattukadas" which, according to them, are preparing and serving food items at Gandhi Nagar in Arpookkara Panchayat in Kottayam District; (2) for a direction to the respondents to consider the representation said to have been filed by the Association within a reasonable time; and (3) for a declaration that the functioning of "thattukadas" which are preparing and serving food items at Gandhi Nagar in Arpookkara Panchayat in Kottayam District is illegal.

3. In our view, for the reliefs of this writ petition, the petitioner has to approach the appropriate civil forum, may be by filing a representative civil suit by making the persons who are conducting business in "thattukadas" as parties to the litigation. The civil court, after taking the evidence that the parties may adduce, may issue appropriate declaration. In that view of the matter, we are not inclined to entertain this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is rejected with liberty W.P.(C). NO.15055 OF 2007 to the Association, if they so desire, to approach the civil court for appropriate reliefs. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) Chief Justice (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.