← Library
High Court of KeralaWP(C)/17665/2013disposed of

C C Antony v. The State Of Kerala

2015-04-01Honourable Mr. Justice A.V.Ramakrishna Pillai4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2015/11TH CHAITHRA, 1937 WP(C).No. 17665 of 2013 (G) ---------------------------- PETITIONER :

---------------------- C.C. ANTONY AGED 64, S/O. CHAKUNNI, CHEENAPALLY HOUSE KONIKARA P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680 306.

BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) RESPONDENT(S) :

----------------------------

1. THE STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT GOVT. SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

2. THE THRISSUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, THRISSUR - 680 001.

R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. NOUSHAD THOTTATHIL R2 BY ADVS. SRI.K.P.VIJAYAN, SC SRI.V.M.SYAM KUMAR SMT.KRIPA ELIZABETH MATHEWS SRI.V.N.HARIDAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01-04-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/-

WP(C).No. 17665 of 2013 (G) ---------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :

------------------------------------- EXHIBIT-P1TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 17/10/2012 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL --------------------------------------------------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Mn

A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J.

-------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 17665 of 2013 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of April, 2015

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking for a direction to the 2nd respondent to return the security deposit due to the petitioner.

2.

The petitioner is a contractor. According to him, he completed eight civil works for the 2nd respondent corporation, which was awarded for the period 2003-04. The petitioner alleges that the security deposits pertaining to the aforesaid works are yet to be returned to him. He submitted Ext.P1 representation for realizing the same, which did not evoke any positive response. It is with this background, the petitioner has come up before this Court.

This Court is of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to return the security deposit due to the petitioner within a time frame.

W.P.(C) No. 17665 of 2013 ..2..

Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to return the security deposit due to the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Sd/- A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI JUDGE bka/-