Vellanchery Moideen Koya v. Vettapparakkal Raghavan
Case brief
What is this about?
The division bench dismissed a rent control revision petition abating it due to the death of the petitioner without appearance by his legal heirs.
The division bench dismissed a rent control revision petition abating it due to the death of the petitioner without appearance by his legal heirs.
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 PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 27TH JANUARY 2011 / 7TH MAGHA 1932
RCRev..No. 238 of 2004()
REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT:
VELLANCHERY MOIDEEN KOYA, S/O. ABDULRAHMAN, AGED 54 YEARS, VELLOOR AMSOM, KONGANNOOR DESOM OF KOYILANDI TALUK.
BY ADV. SRI.A.MOHAMMED
RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:
VETTAPPARAKKAL RAGHAVAN, S/O. CHANDU, AGED 48 YEARS, EDAKKARA AMSOM, KOLAKKAD DESOM, KOILANDI TALUK.
THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JJ.
R.C.R.No. 238 OF 2004
Dated this the 27th day of January, 2011 O R D E R
Pius C.Kuriakose, J.
It is submitted on behalf of the counsel for the revision petitioner that the revision petitioner passed away long ago. According to the counsel, though his legal heirs were contacted and informed about the pendency of the revision petition, none of them turned up . Under the above circumstances, we have no way other than to dismiss the revision petition as abated. It is accordingly dismissed as abated.
PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE
N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE
dpk
Vellanchery Moideen Koya
Vettapparakkal Raghavan
Pius C. Kuriakose
N. K. Balakrishnan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court