IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2009 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 14412 of 2009(V) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. M. VISWESWARAN, S/O.LATE ACHUTHAN, "MANIKKAM",CHEMBIL THODI, PUTHIYARA,KOZHIKODE. 2. PRADEESH KUMAR,S/O.LATE ACHUTHAN, "MANIKKAM",CHEMBIL THODI, PUTHIYARA, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. MR.K.V.SOHAN SMT.SREEJA SOHAN.K. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. KOZHIKODE MUNCIPAL CORPORATION, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, CORPORATION OFFICE, KOZHIKODE. 2. P.C. INDIRA, W/O.LATE PADMANABHAN PILLAI, "SMRITHI NIVAS", 29/2097 A, PALAPARAMBIL, P.O.KUTHIRAVATTAM, KOTTULI AMSOM,KOZHIKODE. 3. T.P. SHEENA, W/O.LATE PRASANTH KUMAR, "SMRITHI NIVAS", 29/2097 A, PALAPARAMBIL, P.O.KUTHIRAVATTAM, KOTTULI AMSOM, KOZHIKODE. R1 BY ADV. MR.K.D.BABU,SC,KOZHIKODE CORPORATION THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Rs/ THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.14412 of 2009-V = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 26th day of May, 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioners claim to be the statutory tenants under respondents 2 and 3. Their application for trade licence was directed to be considered. Ext.P5 judgment was issued by this Court in that regard noticing that according to the petitioners, Marimuthu's case referred to therein applies. The Secretary of the first respondent has issued Ext.P6 decision. There appears to be litigations between the petitioners and respondents 2 and 3 before the Rent Control Court. Since the matter relates to the decision on an application for trade licence, the petitioners have appropriate statutory remedy to the Council of the Municipality which, in turn, could generate appropriate remedial measures before the competent Tribunal, if need arises. WP(C)14412/09 -: 2 :- Under such circumstances, this writ petition is ordered directing that if the petitioners file appeal against Ext.P6, the Council of the first respondent will consider the same in accordance with law and take a decision after hearing the necessary parties. Let this be done within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and the appeal. It is clarified that this judgment does not express either way on the merits of such appeal. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/010609