IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 17TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 695 of 2008(G) ------------------------ PETITIONER: ------------ 1. KHALID.M.H.,AGED 27 YEARS S/O. HAMSA,MAMMASRAYILLATH HOUSE P.O. VADANAPPALLY, THRISSUR DT. 2. P.A.KUTTAPPAN, PERUMBILLISSERY VEEDU P.PO.AYYAPPANKAVU, KOZHUKKULLI,THRISSUR DT. BY ADV. SRI.RENJITH THAMPAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- THRISSUR CORPORATION,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,CORPORATION OFFICE, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.K.B.MOHANDAS,SC,THRISSUR CORPORATION SRI.LELLULAL T.G.THUNDATHIL SRI.K.A.SREEJITH SRI.M.R.DHANIL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(c).No.695 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 6th day of February, 2008 JUDGMENT The grievance of the petitioners who had successfully bid for two rooms in Ollukkara market belonging to Thrissur Corporation is that, even though security deposit and advance rent were remitted by them respectively against Ext.P1 series of receipts and agreements were also executed by them as directed by the Corporation, the Corporation has not handed over the rooms so as to enable them to carry on business. The Corporation has filed a detailed counter affidavit wherein it is alleged that there was delay on the part of the petitioners in remitting security deposits and advance rents. Further it is conceded that though belatedly security deposits and advance rents were remitted by the petitioners and agreements were also executed, it is contended that though the petitioners were directed to collect the keys of the rooms, they have not collected the keys. 2. I have heard the submissions of Sri.Ranjith Thampan, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri.K.B.Mohandas, learned WPC.No.695/08 2 standing counsel for the Corporation. Sri.Ranjith Thampan submitted that the version of the Corporation that the petitioners did not collect the keys though they were asked to do so is highly improbable and I find merit in the above submission. Sri.K.B.Mohandas submits that the idea of the petitioner is to carry on some business other than what is permitted. Having received the security deposits as well as advance rents and having obtained the agreements from the petitioners as directed by the Corporation, the Corporation is bound to hand over the rooms covered by Exts.P1 and P1(a) to the respective petitioners. I allow the writ petition and direct the Corporation to hand over the rooms covered in Exts.P1 and P1(a) to the respective petitioners immediately and at any rate within two weeks of receiving a copy of this judgment. If the petitioners carry on any unauthorised activity in the rooms, they can take action in accordance with law. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE sv. WPC.No.695/08 2