ABDUL SHAHEED, S/O. MUHAMMED, HEERA HUT, KAVUMPURAM P.O., VALANCHERRY MALAPPURAM DISTRICT Vs. THE CORPORATION OF CALICUT, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, CALICUT, CORPORATION, CALICUT, PIN - 673301

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER was the licencee of Room No. 204 in Jawahar building owned by the 1st respondent Corporation. According to him, on 01/04/2006, after submitting Ext. P2 representation, he returned the key of the room to the respondents. It is stated that inspite of it, recovery proceedings have been initiated against him for recovery of the licence fee and other charges for the period from February, 2001 to January, 2009. It is challenging the recovery proceedings, this writ petition is filed. A statement has been filed by the respondents where they have asserted their entitlement to recover Rs.2,41,463/ - from the petitioner for the aforesaid period. As already stated, the case of the petitioner is that after submitting Ext. P2 representation, he has surrendered the key of the room. On that basis, he says that he should be absolved from the liability for the period subsequent to 01/04/2006. It is true that Ext. P2 has been acknowledged by the respondents by Ext. P3 receipt. However, reading of Ext. P2 only shows that the petitioner has expressed his willingness to surrender the key and requested for its take over by the Corporation. Apart from Ext. P2 where an offer to surrender the key was made, there is absolutely no material before this Court to conclude the case of the petitioner that he surrendered the key as claimed by him. Added to this is the dispute in this regard raised by the respondents also. In such circumstances, this Court cannot accept the case of the petitioner that the key has been surrendered by him on 01/04/2006 and therefore he is to be absolved for the liability for the period subsequent thereto. Apart from that, the recovery is for the period from February, 2001 onwards. Admittedly, the petitioner is liable for the period upto 01/04/2006 which liability also has not been paid.

(2.) FOR the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed and I do so. At this stage, counsel for the petitioner sought an instalment facility to pay the amounts due. It is also pointed out that as directed by this Court in the order dated 04/3/2011, Rs.50,000/ - has been remitted by him. Taking note of the request now made, I direct that the petitioner shall pay the balance amount due to the 1st respondent Corporation in 5 equal monthly instalments. first instalment shall be paid on or before 25/1/2013 and the subsequent instalments shall be paid on or before the 25th of every succeeding month. Subject to payment as above, recovery proceedings will stand stayed and in case default is committed, respondents will be free to continue the proceedings already initiated.