IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID THURSDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2011 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 26468 of 2011(G) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER : - ---------------------- THANKAMANI KUMARAN, W/O LATE KUMARAN VYDHYAR, AGED 56, MANNARIPARAMBU, IRUMBANAM, THRIPUNITHURA. BY ADV. SMT.R.RANJINI RESPONDENTS : - ------------------------- 1. TRIPUNITHURA MUNICIPALITY, MUNCIPAL OFFICE, THRIPUNITHURA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY-682 301. 2. T.M.JAYAN, S/O MATHEW, THIRUVANKULAM PANCHAYATH, DOOR NO.13/528, (OLD NO. 5//121), NORTH OF REFINERY ROAD, IRUMBANAM,THRIPUNITHURA-682 301. BY ADVS. SRI.V.M.KURIAN S.C FOR R1 SRI.MATHEW B. KURIAN FOR R1 SRI.K.T.THOMAS FOR R1 SRI.A.T.ANILKUMAR FOR R2 SMT.V.SHYLAJA FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/11/2011. THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 26468 of 2011(G) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT P1 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMMISSION REPORT DATED 06.04.2011 IN O.S. No. 342 OF 2011 OF THE MUNISIFFS COURT, ERNAKULAM. EXT P2 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 20.08.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1st RESPONDENT. RESPONDNETS' EXHIBITS : EXT R2 (a) : COPY OF THE LICENSE ISSUED FROM TRIPUNITHURA MUNICIPALITY. EXT R2 (b) : COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 25.02.2011. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE DMR/- HARUN-UL-RASHID,J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO.26468 OF 2011 ------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2011 JUDGMENT This writ petition is filed for a direction commanding the lst respondent to take appropriate action on Ext.P2 submitted by the petitioner and in furtherance of Ext.P2 to take all appropriate steps for abating nuisance of conducting slaughter house by the 2nd respondent in the building bearing No.13/528(Old No.5/121) of Thiruvankulam Panchayat as expeditiously as possible. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 2nd respondent is using the building in an unhygienic and filthy manner causing great nuisance and health problems to the petitioner and his family, who are adjacent neighbours. The 2nd respondent is the tenant and the petitioner is the landlord in door No.13/528. Petitioner and his family members are residing just behind the portion let out to the 2nd respondent. Petitioner submits that the 2nd respondent is conducting meat stall in the building in an -2- W.P.(C).No.26468/2011 unhygienic and filthy manner causing great nuisance and health hazards to the petitioner and his family. It is also averred in the writ petition that meat of cow, calf and buffalo, is hanged over in front of the building for exhibition and sale, that in another part of the building more than 50 live chicks are stored and that in another portion arrangement has been made for cutting the exhibited meat, stored chickens etc. for sale. It is stated that in the aforesaid circumstances, the petitioner had repeatedly lodged complaints before the lst respondent. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the lapse of 1 ½ months, the lst respondent has not taken any action and therefore, the petitioner is constrained to approached this Court for the aforesaid reliefs. 3. The 2nd respondent filed a detailed counter affidavit in which it is stated that the writ petition is filed after suppressing the actual facts and as an experimental basis to see that whether she could stop the business carried out by the 2nd respondent and that this is the 3rd litigation which is being filed by the petitioner against -3- W.P.(C).No.26468/2011 him and that the petitioner has already filed RCP.No.191/2009 before the Rent Control Court, Ernakulam seeking eviction of the 2nd respondent. It is also pointed out that the petitioner again filed O.S.No.344/11 before the Munsiff's Court, Ernakulam seeking an order of injunction against him. The 2nd respondent submits that he has been conducting a cold storage, chicken centre and provisional store business, that he had conducted business in two rooms, that due to the repeated compulsion of the petitioner he has vacated one room and given vacant possession. It is also pointed out that the 2nd respondent has been conducting business in the room in question on the basis of the valid licence issued from the Muncipality. Ext.R2(a) is the copy of the licence issued by the lst respondent-Municipality. The 2nd respondent submits that after expiry of the period shown in Ext.R2(a) on 25/2/2011, he submitted an application for renewal of licence, that so far the licence has not been renewed and therefore he is conducting the business on the basis of deemed licence. -4- W.P.(C).No.26468/2011 4. In the statement filed by the lst respondent it is stated that on receipt of Ext.P2 complaint enquiries were conducted through the Junior Health Inspector and on the basis of the report of the Junior Health Inspector, notice was issued to the 2nd respondent directing him to stop his activities within 24 hours and report compliance of the same to the Municipality. It is also stated that 2nd notice was issued on 11/10/11 to the 2nd respondent to stop the functioning of slaughter house and that to ensure that slaughter house is not functioning in the building, the Sub Inspector of Police was addressed vide letter dated 11/10/2011. It is also stated in the statement that inspection was conducted on 12/10/11 and it was seen that slaughter house was not functioning. 5. The petitioner submitted Ext.P2 complaint before the lst respondent-Municipality. It is stated that Ext.P2 complaint is pending consideration before the lst respondent- Municipality. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the lst respondent- -5- W.P.(C).No.26468/2011 Municipality to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2 complaint, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and the 2nd respondent, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge. kcv.