The court dismissed an original petition and refused to grant a review, holding that the petitioner failed to prove his disability was 20% or more during the claim period, thus entitling him to a pension.
Review petition dismissed; original petition remains dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH AUGUST 2009 / 28TH SRAVANA 1931 RP.No. 847 of 2003(I) --------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN OP.14366/1999 .................... REVIEW PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS: --------------------------------------------------------1. S.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, EX.SIGNALMAN (35855-TS.23207) VYOMA SADANAM, PALAPPALLY VILA, KAROOR, POTHENCODE P.O., TRIVANDRUM, KERALA (DIED)
2. LEELAKUMARY AMMA, VYOMA SADANAM, PALAPPALLY VILA, KAROOR, POTHENCODE, ANDOORKONAM VILLAGE.
3. VYOMAKESH KURUP, S/O. LEELAKUMARY AMMA, DO.
4. VASUNDARA DEVI, S/O.LEELAKUMARY AMMA, DO.
BY ADV. SRI.G.SASIDHARAN CHEMPAZHANTHIYIL
RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS:
2. SENIOR RECORD OFFICER, OIC RECORDS, SIGNAL ABHILEKH KARYALAYA, SIGNAL RECORDS, POST BAG NO.5, JABALPUR (MP)
3. CONTROLLER OF DEFENCE ACCOUNTS (P), ALLAHABAD.
4. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, NEW DELHI.
R1 TO R4 BY MR.JOHN VARGHESE, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL BY ADV. MR.P.S.SREEDHARAN PILLAI, SCGSC MR.A.JAYASANKAR, ADDL.CGSC
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Kss
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
-------------------------------------------------------
R.P.No.847/03 in O.P. NO.14366 1999
----------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 19th day of November, 2009
O R D E R
The Original Petition was disposed of by judgment dated 14.10.2003. The petitioner contends that his entitlement for disability pension for the period from 1953 to 1971 has not been decided in the judgment and therefore review of the judgment is sought.
R.P.No.847/03
:2 :
assessment of disability was made and it was found that the disability was less than 20%. In such circumstances, this court could not have overruled the assessment made by the experts of the Medical Board and concluded that the disability of the petitioner was more than 20%.
Review Petition fails and is dismissed.
(ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE
vi/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a review of the judgment dismissing his original petition for disability pension.
Whether the petitioner made out a case for review given the disability assessment finding.
S.Ramachandran Nair
Leelakumary Amma
Vyomakesh Kurup
Vasundara Devi
Defence Pension Disbursing Officer
Union of India
Antony Dominic
P.N.Ravindran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
