N.Rajagopal v. M.v.Bahuleyan
Case brief
What is this about?
TheCivilRevisionPetitionwasdismissedbytheHighCourtofKeralaheldingthatthelearnedcourtbelowwasrightinrejectingthepetitioner'sprayertodeletetheconditionforfurnishingsecurityrequiredforcondonationofdelay.
What did the court decide?
No order passed. Civil Revision Petition dismissed.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN
THURSDAY, THE 7TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 18TH MAGHA 1929
CRP.No. 2513 of 2002()
------------------------------------AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 12/06/2002 IN IA. 2698 /2002 IN CMA.53/2002 of D.C. & SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM
REVN. PETITIONER/ PETR.IN IA.NO.2698/02 IN CMA.53/02 THE D.C. EKM:
N.RAJAGOPAL, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O. LATE NARAYANAN, T.C.NO.7/176, KANJIRAMPARA, VATTIYOORKAVU, TRIVANDRUM.
BY ADV. SRI.K.SASIKUMAR
ADV. SRI. K.B. SURESH
RESPONDENTS/RESP.IN IA.2698/02 IN CMA.53/02 OF THE D.COURT,EKM: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the condition for furnishing security imposed in the order for condonation of delay should be deleted.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
N. Rajagopal
- respondent
M.V. Bahuleyan
Coram
K.T. Sankaran
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court