E.v.Francis v. P.G.Baby
Case brief
What is this about?
In a review petition, the court recalled a previous order disposing of a writ petition without notice. The decision was based on undisclosed facts showing pending related suits and proceedings concerning the same land subject matter.
What did the court decide?
The judgment in WPC No. 2585/08 is recalled.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC
FRIDAY, THE 4TH APRIL 2008 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1930
RP.No. 387 of 2008(G)
---------------------
REVIEW PETITIONERS/ RESPONDENTS 4 AND 6 IN WPC
--------------------------------------------------------------------
1. E.V.FRANCIS, AGED 49, S/O.VAREED ERALI HOUSE, MANJAPRA P.O. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
2. E.V.POULOSE, S/O.VAREED EAST FORT, THRISSUR.
BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
RESPONDENTS: PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 IN WPC
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Technical Commission Report should be recalled due to non-disclosure of parallel litigation regarding the same land.
Whether the impugned order in WP(C) No. 2585/08 deserves to be recalled.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
E.V.FRANCIS
- petitioner
E.V.POULOSE
- respondent
P.G.BABY
- respondent
THE TALUK SURVEYOR
- respondent
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court