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.

Pavithran a., vs Raghav @ Raghavan a.,

Pavithran a., vs Raghav @ Raghavan a.,

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Mar 24, 2025
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1277401

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 Orders High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
RSA/249/2020
Subject
Right to Information

Case Summary

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

Right to Information

Key legal issue
Right to Information

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Pavithran a.,

Respondent

Raghav @ Raghavan a.,

Excerpt

in the high court of kerala at ernakulampresent the honourable mr. justice m.a.abdul hakhim monday, the 24th day of march 2025 / 3rd chaithra, 1947 rsa no. 249 of 2020 against the judgment and decree dated 30.10.2019 in as no.82 of 2016 of sub court, kannur arising out of the judgment and decree dated 27.08.2016 in os no.179 of 2014 of principal munsiff court, kannur appellants/appellants/defendants 1 to 5 & 7 to 9: 1 pavithran a., aged 63 years s/o.late andi achari, oladathu thazha, p.o.azhikode, 2 shantha a., aged 55 years 3 vanaja a., aged 47 years 4 vishalakshi, aged 59 years w/o.late lakshmanan, ambili metal works, puthiyatheru, 5 jayesh, aged 39 years rsa no. 249 of 2020 2 6 ambili, aged 35 years d/o.late lakshmanan, ambili metal works, puthiyatheru, 7 rijesh, aged 33 years by advs. v.r.kesava kaimal smt.c.devika rani kaimal respondents/respondents/plaintiff & defendants no.6:1 raghav @ raghavan a., aged 72 years, s/o.late andi achari manjunatha garage, santha katte, belthangdi, karnataka - 591 102. 2 vijesh, aged 42 years s/o.late lakshmanan ambili metal works, puthiyatheru, p.o.chirakkal, kannur - 670 011. by adv p.p.ramachandran - r1. this regular second appeal having been finally heard on 24.03.2025, the court on the same day delivered the following: rsa no. 249 of 2020 3judgmentthe learned counsel for the appellant submits that the subject matter has been settled between the parties and is not pressing the matter. accordingly, the regular second appeal is dismissed as not pressed. sd/- m.a.abdul hakhim judge mus

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM MONDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 3RD CHAITHRA, 1947 RSA NO. 249 OF 2020 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 30.10.2019 IN AS NO.82 OF 2016 OF SUB COURT, KANNUR ARISING OUT OF THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 27.08.2016 IN OS NO.179 OF 2014 OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT, KANNUR APPELLANTS/APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS 1 TO 5 & 7 TO 9: 1 PAVITHRAN A., AGED 63 YEARS S/O.LATE ANDI ACHARI, OLADATHU THAZHA, P.O.AZHIKODE, 2 SHANTHA A., AGED 55 YEARS 3 VANAJA A., AGED 47 YEARS 4 VISHALAKSHI, AGED 59 YEARS W/O.LATE LAKSHMANAN, AMBILI METAL WORKS, PUTHIYATHERU, 5 JAYESH, AGED 39 YEARS RSA NO. 249 OF 2020 2 6 AMBILI, AGED 35 YEARS D/O.LATE LAKSHMANAN, AMBILI METAL WORKS, PUTHIYATHERU, 7 RIJESH, AGED 33 YEARS BY ADVS. V.R.KESAVA KAIMAL SMT.C.DEVIKA RANI KAIMAL RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFF & DEFENDANTS NO.6:

1 RAGHAV @ RAGHAVAN A., AGED 72 YEARS, S/O.LATE ANDI ACHARI MANJUNATHA GARAGE, SANTHA KATTE, BELTHANGDI, KARNATAKA - 591 102. 2 VIJESH, AGED 42 YEARS S/O.LATE LAKSHMANAN AMBILI METAL WORKS, PUTHIYATHERU, P.O.CHIRAKKAL, KANNUR - 670 011. BY ADV P.P.RAMACHANDRAN - R1. THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: RSA NO. 249 OF 2020 3

JUDGMENT

The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the subject matter has been settled between the parties and is not pressing the matter. Accordingly, the Regular Second Appeal is dismissed as not pressed. Sd/- M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM JUDGE mus

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial