M.M. Varghese vs Mini

M.M. Varghese vs MINI

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jan 31, 2020

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1732391

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/1732391
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice a.Muhamed Mustaque
Decided On: Jan 31, 2020
Case Number: RP/107/2020

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

M.M. Varghese

Respondent

MINI

Excerpt

.....represented by her mother and guardian mini, kalappurakkal house, pottassery p o, mannarkkad taluk, palakkad-678598. r.p no.107/2020 2 5 united india insurance company limited p.b.no.12, d block, 1st floor, pazheri plaza, kodathepadi, mannarkkad, palakkad-678582. other present: sri.p k manojkimar, sc. this review petition having come up for admission on 31.01.2020, the court on the same day passed the following: r.p no.107/2020 3o r d e rdated this the 31st day of january 2020 this review petition is filed by respondents 1 and 2 in the original petition contending that though vakalath was filed on behalf of them, their counsel's name was not shown in the cause title which resulted in disposing the original petition without hearing them.2. it may be true that the review petitioners were not heard on thedate of disposal of the original petition. however, it is to be noted that this court only ordered restoration of the original petition which was mistakenly withdrawn on account of ignorance on part of the counsel who appeared for the claimants before the tribunal. in such circumstances, there is no scope for reviewing the judgment. the petitioners can very well defend the case before the tribunal in accordance with law. with the above observation, this review petition is dismissed. sd/- a.muhamed mustaque judge smp

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE FRIDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 11TH MAGHA, 1941 RP.No.107 OF 2020 IN OP (MAC). 101/2019 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OP (MAC) 101/2019 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 13.12.2019 REVIEW PETITIONERS/ RESPONDENT 1 & 2:
1 M.M. VARGHESE S/O.MATHEW M.C, 1/435, MANIYAMBUDAVATH HOUSE, VIYYAKURISSI, POTTASSERY, MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD-678 598. 2 SHAMEER.C S/O. ABDUL SALAM, CHAKKINGALTHODI HOUSE, KORNAKUNNU, IRUMBAKACHOLA P O, KANJIRAPUZHA, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD-678 001. BY ADV. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS AND OTHER RESPONDENT: 1 MINI AGED 48 YEARS KALAPURACKKAL HOUSE, POTTASSERY P O, 2 JOSMI XAVIOR AGED 26 YEARS W/O. LATE NAIJU, KOIKKARA HOUSE, CHUVANNAMANNU, PATTIKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3 JOSNA XAVIOR KALAPURAKKAL HOUSE, POTTASSERY P O,
4 SONA XAVIOR(MINOR) AGED 17 YEARS, W/O.LATE XAVIOR, KALAPURAKKAL HOUSE, POTTASSERY P O, MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD-678598, REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER AND GUARDIAN MINI, KALAPPURAKKAL HOUSE, POTTASSERY P O, MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD-678598. R.P No.107/2020 2 5 UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED P.B.NO.12, D BLOCK, 1ST FLOOR, PAZHERI PLAZA, KODATHEPADI, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD-678582. OTHER PRESENT: SRI.P K MANOJKIMAR, SC. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.01.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.P No.107/2020 3

O R D E R

Dated this the 31st day of January 2020 This review petition is filed by respondents 1 and 2 in the original petition contending that though vakalath was filed on behalf of them, their counsel's name was not shown in the cause title which resulted in disposing the original petition without hearing them.

2. It may be true that the review petitioners were not heard on the

date of disposal of the original petition. However, it is to be noted that this Court only ordered restoration of the original petition which was mistakenly withdrawn on account of ignorance on part of the counsel who appeared for the claimants before the Tribunal. In such circumstances, there is no scope for reviewing the judgment. The petitioners can very well defend the case before the Tribunal in accordance with law. With the above observation, this review petition is dismissed. Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE smp

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2020 Same Parties M.M. Varghese vs MINI Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice a.Muhamed Mustaque