Allowed

Lekshmikutty Amma Sarada Amma v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC7 Jun 2007WP(C)/451/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a writ petition directing the Subordinate Judge at Attingal to reconsider the calculation of shared decree money payable among decree-holders, applying recent Supreme Court precedents on excess deposit rules.

What did the court decide?

Subordinate Judge directed to take fresh decision on correct payable amount within two months; stay order continues.

Lekshmikutty Amma Sarada Amma Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2007)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE THURSDAY, THE 7TH JUNE 2007 / 17TH JYAISHTA 1929

¶4

WP(C).No. 451 of 2005(D) -----------------------LAR.2/1984 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,ATTINGAL ....................

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

¶7

LEKSHMIKUTTY AMMA SARADA AMMA, RESIDING AT SATHIPRIYA, MUTTADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.J.HARIKUMAR SRI.HARIKUMAR.S.

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

¶11

STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶12

E.S.SAHDA BEEVI, MOHJA MANZIL, THATTATHUMALA.

¶13

BIJU, RESIDING AT DO.DO.

¶14

MOHJA BEEVI, RESIDING AT DO.DO.

¶15

R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.SHYSON P.MANGUZHA

¶16

R4 BY ADV. SRI.S.SUDHEESHKAR

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/06/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

APPENDIX(WPC 451/05)

¶19

PETITIONER'S EXTS.:

¶20

EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE DECREE IN LAR NO.2/1984 DATED 22.12.1988 ON THE FILE OF THE SUB COURT, ATTINGAL.

¶21

EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN LAA NO.369/90 DATED 29.11.1996.

¶22

EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 21.8.2003.

¶23

EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 21.6.2004.

¶24

EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER ON E.P.59/89 AND 32/1999 IN LAR 2/84 DATED 1.9.2004 ON THE FILE OF THE SUB COURT, ATTINGAL.

¶25

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J.

¶26

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 451 of 2005

¶27

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 7^th June, 2007

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

Heard Mr.J.Harikumar, counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Shyson P.Manguzha, learned Government Pleader for the State.

¶30

Having regard to the submissions I feel that there is justification for directing a reconsideration of the issue by the learned Subordinate Judge in the light of the judgment of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Sunder v. Union of India [2001(3) KLT 489(SC)] and the subsequent judgment of the Supreme Court in Gurpreet Singh v. Union of India [ (2006) 8 S.C.C. 457]. Accordingly, Ext.P5 is set aside and the learned Subordinate Judge is directed to take a fresh decision regarding the correct amount which was payable to the decree-holder-petitioner and also to the fellow decree-holders at the time when the alleged excess deposit was made. Decision as directed above will be taken after hearing both sides at the earliest and at any rate within two months of receiving copy of this judgment. The order of stay will continue till such time as decision is taken by the court below.

¶31

The Writ Petition is allowed as above. No costs.

¶32

srd

¶33

PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE

¶34

W.P.C.No. - 2 -

Lekshmikutty Amma Sarada Amma v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lekshmikutty Amma Sarada Amma v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.R.Cicily Mathew Vs Corporation of Kochi,Rep.by Secretary

K.P.Karthiyani Vs Manager,North Malabar Gramin Bank

S.Sundaresh Pai Vs Recovery Officer,Drt & Another

C.G.Thankachan Vs South Indian Bank

Thomas Varghese Vs the Competent Authority (Kerala)

Madhava Kini Vs K.Govindan Nair