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.

Gracy vs State of Kerala

GRACY vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jul 25, 2025
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1282339

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
Case Number
OP/38885/2002
Subject
Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

GRACY

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

op no. 38926 of 2002 p.mariyappan moongalar puthuval, smt.t.s.maya (thiyadil) sri.k.p.unnikrishnan 1 the state ofkerala the chief secretary, government of kerala,, thiruvananthapuram. 2 the tahsildar peermedu taluk 5 harisons malayalam ltd. willingdon island, kochi - 682 002, sri.e.k.nandakumar sr. other present: gp sri unnikrishnan s along with op.38180/2002, 38885/2002, the court on the same day delivered the following: op no. 38180 of 2002 ambrose, s/o joseph, moongalar puduval, moongalar kara, periyar village. 1 state of kerala the chief secretary, government of kerala,, thiruvananthapuram. 2 the tasildar peermade taluk 5 harisons malayalam ltd. registered office at britwo road, willingdon island,, kochi 682003, along with op.38926/2002, 38885/2002 and connected cases, the court on op no. 38885 of 2002 gracy, moongalar, puduval, 1 state of kerala represented by the chief secretary, government of kerala, thiruvananthapuram 2 the tahsildar peermade taluk idukki district peermad taluk, idukki district peermade taluk, idukki district 5 harrisons malayalam ltd. willingdon, island, kochi-682002, along with op.38926/2002, 38180/2002 and connected cases, the court onjudgmentthe petitioner and counsel remained absent. advocate sunitha appeared on behalf of the counsel and she is not ready to argue the matter. all these original petitions are of the year 2002. now, almost 20 years have elapsed. hence, the absence of counsel cannot be condoned. all these original petitions will stand dismissed for non-prosecution. sd/- p.somarajan judge rkr-13/07

Full Judgment

OP NO. 38926 OF 2002 P.MARIYAPPAN MOONGALAR PUTHUVAL, SMT.T.S.MAYA (THIYADIL) SRI.K.P.UNNIKRISHNAN 1 THE STATE OFKERALA THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2 THE TAHSILDAR PEERMEDU TALUK 5 HARISONS MALAYALAM LTD. WILLINGDON ISLAND, KOCHI - 682 002, SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR SR. OTHER PRESENT: GP SRI UNNIKRISHNAN S ALONG WITH OP.38180/2002, 38885/2002, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP NO. 38180 OF 2002 AMBROSE, S/O JOSEPH, MOONGALAR PUDUVAL, MOONGALAR KARA, PERIYAR VILLAGE. 1 STATE OF KERALA THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2 THE TASILDAR PEERMADE TALUK 5 HARISONS MALAYALAM LTD. REGISTERED OFFICE AT BRITWO ROAD, WILLINGDON ISLAND,, KOCHI 682003, ALONG WITH OP.38926/2002, 38885/2002 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON OP NO. 38885 OF 2002 GRACY, MOONGALAR, PUDUVAL, 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2 THE TAHSILDAR PEERMADE TALUK IDUKKI DISTRICT PEERMAD TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT PEERMADE TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT 5 HARRISONS MALAYALAM LTD. WILLINGDON, ISLAND, KOCHI-682002, ALONG WITH OP.38926/2002, 38180/2002 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON

JUDGMENT

The petitioner and counsel remained absent. Advocate Sunitha appeared on behalf of the counsel and she is not ready to argue the matter. All these original petitions are of the year 2002. Now, almost 20 years have elapsed. Hence, the absence of counsel cannot be condoned. All these original petitions will stand dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- P.SOMARAJAN JUDGE rkr-13/07

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial