NARAYANAN Vs. IRINJALAKUDA MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) <DJG>PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, J.</DJG> I do not find any justification in this case for invoking the jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution. Having regard to the facts which have been brought on record by the counter affidavit and the documents placed on record, this writ petition will stand dismissed.

(2.) However, considering the submission of Sri.G.Sreekumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner that materials and equipments belonging to the petitioner are lying inside the room and there will be a direction to the Municipality to open the premises in the presence of the petitioner, so that if anything belonging to the petitioner is actually found in the room, the petitioner can be permitted to remove those materials.

(3.) As regards the sum of Rs.42,000.00 which was paid by the petitioner as security deposit at the time of entrustment of the room, the Municipality, after adjusting whatever amounts are legally and correctly due to the Municipality, will pay the balance amount to the petitioner. Needful will be done by the Municipality within one month of receiving a copy of this judgment. This judgment will not stand in the way of the petitioner submitting tenders, if the fresh tenders are invited in respect of these rooms or any other rooms in the shopping complex.