Thomas vs Mukundan

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Feb 01, 2022

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1441337

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1441337
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice P.B.Suresh Kumar,Honourable Mrs. Justice C.S. Sudha
Decided On: Feb 01, 2022
Case Number: WA/62/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Thomas

Respondent

Mukundan

Excerpt

.....police station, puthencruze p. o.,writ appeal no.62 of 2022 2 m.k.dileepan deepak t.nedungadan s.karthik menon rekha.c.nair this writ appeal having come up for admission on 01.02.2022, the court on the same day delivered the following: writ appeal no.62 of 2022 3 p.b.suresh kumar & c.s.sudha, jj. writ appeal no.62 of 2022 dated this the 1st day of february, 2022judgmentp.b.suresh kumar, j.the learned counsel for the appellant submits that orders have been passed by the competent authority on ext.p6 application preferred by the first respondent as directed in the impugned judgment and the appellant has been served with the said order. the learned counsel also submits that the order is in favour of the appellant. the learned government pleader also confirms the said fact.2. the learned counsel for the first respondent submits that the order referred to above is yet to be served on his client.3. in the light of the submissions aforesaid, in so far asthe order in the impugned judgment directing the parties to maintain writ appeal no.62 of 2022 4 status quo as regards the property is no longer in existence, it is unnecessary to consider the correctness of the said order. the writ appeal is accordingly closed. if the order passed on ext.p6 application is not served on the first respondent, the competent authority is directed to serve a copy of the same to the first respondent forthwith. p.b.suresh kumar, judge. c.s.sudha, judge. ykb

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 12TH MAGHA, 1943 WA NO. 62 OF 2022 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 26012/2021 DATED 17.12.2021 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA APPELLANT/4TH RESPONDENT: THOMAS AGED 53 YEARS S/O. PAILY, PALACHUVADU HOUSE, PANNIKUZHY KARA, PUTHENCRUZE P. O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 682308. SUNIL KUMAR A.G JOHN VIPIN RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 AND 5:
1 MUKUNDAN AGED 57 YEARS S/O. LATE NARAYANAN, VILLAMPURATHU HOUSE, PANNIKUZHY KARA, PUTHENCRUZE VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682308. 2 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD P. O., ERNAKULAM - 682030. 3 THE TAHSILDAR KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, TALUK OFFICE, MINI CIVIL STATION, PERUMBAVOOR P. O., ERNAKULAM - 683542. 4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER PUTHENCRUZE VILLAGE OFFICE, PUTHENCRUZE P. O., 5 CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PUTHENCRUZE POLICE STATION, PUTHENCRUZE P. O.,
Writ Appeal No.62 of 2022 2 M.K.DILEEPAN DEEPAK T.NEDUNGADAN S.KARTHIK MENON REKHA.C.NAIR THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Writ Appeal No.62 of 2022 3 P.B.SURESH KUMAR & C.S.SUDHA, JJ. Writ Appeal No.62 of 2022 Dated this the 1st day of February, 2022

JUDGMENT

P.B.Suresh Kumar, J.

The learned counsel for the appellant submits that orders have been passed by the competent authority on Ext.P6 application preferred by the first respondent as directed in the impugned judgment and the appellant has been served with the said order. The learned counsel also submits that the order is in favour of the appellant. The learned Government Pleader also confirms the said fact.

2. The learned counsel for the first respondent submits that the order referred to above is yet to be served on his client.

3. In the light of the submissions aforesaid, in so far as

the order in the impugned judgment directing the parties to maintain Writ Appeal No.62 of 2022 4 status quo as regards the property is no longer in existence, it is unnecessary to consider the correctness of the said order. The writ appeal is accordingly closed. If the order passed on Ext.P6 application is not served on the first respondent, the competent authority is directed to serve a copy of the same to the first respondent forthwith. P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE. C.S.SUDHA, JUDGE. YKB

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2022 Same Parties Thomas vs Mukundan Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice P.B.Suresh Kumar,Honourable Mrs. Justi...

Competent authority Government pleader Police Station high court status quo Has been