The writ petition filed by the Respondent against the Petitioner's complaint was closed as the Petitioner had sold the subject property and submitted that it was no longer interested in executing the order challenged in the writ. No substantive judgment on the merits of jurisdiction was delivered.
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 B.P.RAY
MONDAY, THE 19TH DECEMBER 2011 / 28TH AGRAHAYANA 1933
WP(C).No. 15539 of 2004(Y) --------------------------
PETITIONER:
KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADV. SRI.JAMES KOSHY.N., SC. KSRTC SRI.K.PRABHAKARAN, SC, K.S.R.T.C.
SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA,SC,KSRTC SRI.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR,SC, KSRTC
RESPONDENTS:
R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.P.RAJEEVAN R2 BY SRI.M.SREEKUMAR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) NO.15539/2004
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
| EXT.P1 | : TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF COMPLAINT NO.1175/2002 DATED 09.12.2002. |
|---|---|
| EXT.P2 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 10.06.2003. |
| EXT.P3 | : TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 16.09.2003. |
| EXT.P4 | : TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REVIEW PETITION DATED 31.10.2003. |
| EXT.P5 | : TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE STANDING COUNSEL DATED 31.10.2003. |
| EXT.P6 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 27.01.2004. |
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
rv
B.P. RAY, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.15539 of 2004
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 19th day of December, 2011.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has filed this writ petition with the following
prayers:
The learned counsel for the first respondent submits that the first respondent has sold the property to some other person and he is not interested in executing the order passed by the 5th respondent. In view of the said submission, this writ petition is closed.
sd/- B.P. RAY, JUDGE.
rv
O.P. No.
-:2:-
B.P. RAY, J.
O.P.No. 13887 of 2002
O.P. No.
-:3:-
Dated this the 16th day of November, 2011.
JUDGMENT
Kerala State Road Transport Corporation
Parameswaran Pillai
Parassala Grama Panchayat
District Collector, Thiruvananthapuram
State of Kerala
Kerala Lok Ayukta
B.P. Ray
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
