Omana v. Satheesan
Case brief
What is this about?
Writ petition challenging an interim order passed in civil proceedings was dismissed. The Court held the District Judge’s order was not vitiated by major infirmities, noting the petitioners’ explanation for delay was unfounded.
What did the court decide?
The writ petition is dismissed and no costs.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
FRIDAY, THE 8TH JUNE 2007 / 18TH JYAISHTA 1929 WP(C).No. 6163 of 2004(H) ------------------------OS.560/1997 of I ADDL.M.C.,THRISSUR CMA.2/2003 of ADDL.DISTRICT COURT, THRISSUR
PETITIONER:
- OMANA W/O. LATE VELIYATH VASU, PANAMKULAM DESOM, OORAKAM VILLAGE THRISSUR TALUK.
- SAJEEV KUMAR, AGED 22, S/O.LATE VELIYATH VASU, PANAMKULAM DESOM, ORAKAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK. 3. SARITHA D/O. OMANA AND VELIYATH VASU, PANAMKULAM DESOM, ORAKAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK. 4. KOCHUMOL, W/O. LATE GANAPATHY, VELIYATH HOUSE, PANAMKULAM DESOM, OORAKAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK. 5. SUNIL KUMAR, S/O. LATE GANAPATHY, VELIYATH HOUSE, PANAMKULAM DESOM, OORAKAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK. 6. SURESH, S/O. LATE GANAPATHY, VELIYATH HOUSE, PANAMKULAM DESOM, OORAKAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK. 7. SOBHANA, D/O. LATE GANAPATHY, VELIYATH HOUSE, PANAMKULAM DESOM, OORAKAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) SRI.RENJITH B.MARAR
RESPONDENTS:
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner's condonation of delay order by the District Judge is vitiated by infirmities warranting correction under Article 227.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
OMANA W/O. LATE VELIYATH VASU AND OTHRS
- respondent
SATHEESAN S/O. VETTANATTU BALAN
Coram
PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court