Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Pareeth Vs. State of Kerala

Pareeth vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Nov 07, 2013
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1097390

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Pareeth

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....before the ist respondent. exhibit p8. true copy of the report with the t.p register in t.p no.1783 of kunnathunadu village of the property in block no.36 in re.sy.no.314/1 of kuinnathunad village officer dated112.2007. exhibit p9. true copy of the order communicated by the kunnathunadu tahsildar to the district collector, ernakulam dated286.2008 obtained by the petitioner under right to information act. exhibit p10. true copy of the petition dated612.2008 filed by the petitioner before the revenue divisional officer, moovattupuzha. exhibit p11. true copy of the communication forwarded by the tahasildar, kunnathunadu to the r.d.o moovattupuzha obtained by the petitioner under right to information act, dated185.2010. respondent's exhibits : nil. //true copy// p.a. to judge bp p.r. ramachandra menon, j.======================== w.p.(c). no. 18221 of 2012 -------------------------------------------- dated this the 7th day of november, 2013 judgment the petitioner has approached this court with the following prayer: " i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the respondents 1 to 3 to take final decision on ext.p6 & p7 application on conclusion of ext.p9." 2. when the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the grievance of the petitioner has also been projected by way of ext.p7 complaint which is pending consideration before the first respondent and that the petitioner will be satisfied, if a direction is given to the said respondent to consider and dispose of the same within a reasonable time.3. heard the learned government pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3.4. considering the limited nature of relief sought for, this court does not find it necessary to go into the merits of the case. w.p.c. no. 18221 of 2012 -2- in the said circumstance, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the first respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on ext.p7 in accordance.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE7H DAY OF NOVEMBER201316TH KARTHIKA, 1935 WP(C).No. 18221 of 2012 (C) ---------------------------- PETITIONER : ---------- PAREETH, AGED59YEARS S/O.LATE ABOOBABER @ OUKKAR KANJIRAKKOTTIL @ PALAKKAL HOUSE, PERINGALA P.O KIZHAKKAMBALAM, ALUVA ERNAKULAM PRESENTLY RESIDING AT KADAVIMADATHIL HOUSE, KULASEKHARAMANGALAM P.O, VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM. BY ADVS.SRI.GIGIMON ISSAC SMT.SUMITHA K.S. RESPONDENTS : ------------ 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CIVIL STATION, ERNAKULAM. 682 030.

2. THE TAHSILDAR KUNNATHUNADD, ERNAKULAM683542.

3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER MOOVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM686663.

4. ASHARAF S/O.LATE SAINUDEEN @ EANIKUTTY KANJIRAKKOTTIL @ PALAKKAL HOUSE, PERINGALA P.O KIZHAKKAMBALAM, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM682312. R1 TO R3 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.R.PADMARAJ R4 BY ADV. SRI.PAUL K.VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON0711-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: BP WP(C).No. 18221 of 2012 (C) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS : EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED NO.2780/1975 OF AIKKARANADA S.R.O. EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF THE REJECTION ORDER

DATED147.1997 ISSUED BY THE SURVEY DEPARTMENT. EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF THE PROPERTY TAX RECEIPT DATED128.2004. EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF THE MUTATION DETAILS WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTIES IN BLOCK36 RE.SY.NO.314/1 OF KUNNATHUNAD VILLAGE, DATED146.2005. EXHIBIT P5. TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT NO.C5-16584/97 DATED2411.1997 OF KUNNATHUNAD TALUK SURVEYOR ISSUED WITH SKETCH OF THE PROPERTY AND RESURVEY DETAILS. EXHIBIT P6. TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED165.2006 SEEKING CANCELLATIOJN OF THE FALSE MUTATION PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE KUNANTHUNADU TAHSILDAR. EXHIBIT P7. TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED15.2007 SEEKING SET ASIDE THE FALSE MUTATION BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P8. TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT WITH THE T.P REGISTER IN T.P NO.1783 OF KUNNATHUNADU VILLAGE OF THE PROPERTY IN BLOCK NO.36 IN RE.SY.NO.314/1 OF KUINNATHUNAD VILLAGE OFFICER DATED112.2007. EXHIBIT P9. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER

COMMUNICATED BY THE KUNNATHUNADU TAHSILDAR TO THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM DATED286.2008 OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT. EXHIBIT P10. TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED612.2008 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MOOVATTUPUZHA. EXHIBIT P11. TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION FORWARDED BY THE TAHASILDAR, KUNNATHUNADU TO THE R.D.O MOOVATTUPUZHA OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, DATED185.2010. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE BP P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

======================== W.P.(C). No. 18221 of 2012 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of November, 2013 JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayer: " i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the respondents 1 to 3 to take final decision on Ext.P6 & P7 application on conclusion of Ext.P9." 2. When the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the grievance of the petitioner has also been projected by way of Ext.P7 complaint which is pending consideration before the first respondent and that the petitioner will be satisfied, if a direction is given to the said respondent to consider and dispose of the same within a reasonable time.

3. Heard the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3.

4. Considering the limited nature of relief sought for, this Court does not find it necessary to go into the merits of the case. W.P.C. No. 18221 of 2012 -2- In the said circumstance, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the first respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P7 in accordance with law also in the light of Ext.P9 and such other relevant materials, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the fourth respondent at the earliest, at any rate, within 'three months' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the 1st respondent for further steps. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. kp/-

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial