Dismissed
C.Mary v. State of Kerala
Kerala HCWP(C)/6694/2005
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE…
What the court decided
AI extract
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.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
FRIDAY, THE 17TH JUNE 2011 / 27TH JYAISHTA 1933
WP(C).No. 6694 of 2005(V)
PETITIONER :
---------------------
1. C.MARY, W/O.CHARLEY, AGED 40 YEARS, DEVIKULAM TALUK, KANNAN DEVAN MALA THENMALA ESTATE, LOWER DIVISION, MARAYOOR VILLAGE.
2. SATHYA RAJ, S/O.MUTHU, AGED 40 YEARS, THENMALA ESTATE, KANNANDEVAN MALA, LOWER DIVISION, MARAYOOR VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT.
RESPONDENT(S):
-------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI DISTRICT, KUYILMALA, IDUKKI.
3. THAHASILDAR, DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT.
4. VILLAGE OFFICER, MARAYOOR VILLAGE, MARAYOOR P.O., PIN-685620.
5. T.J.SUNNY, THEVARMADATHIL (H), MARAYOOR P.O., PIN-685 620.
R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. M.H. HANIL KUMAR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Mn
...2/-
WP(C).No. 6694 of 2005(V)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 24/12/1998. EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 27/1/2005. EXT.P3 : COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 27/1/2005.
EXT.P4 : COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR MUTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 22/1/2005.
EXT.P5 : COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR MUTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 22/1/2005.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS - NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
Mn
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J
W.P.(C).6694/2005
Dated this the 17th day of June, 2011
JUDGMENT
It was brought to the notice of this Court that the fifth respondent was no more and the petitioners wanted to have more time to take steps to implead the legal heirs of the fifth respondent, which was granted. No steps have been taken till date. Today, there is no representation for the petitioners as well. Hence the writ petition is dismissed for non prosecution.
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, Judge
mrcs
C. MARY
SATHYA RAJ
STATE OF KERALA
DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI DISTRICT
THAHASILDAR, DEVIKULAM
VILLAGE OFFICER, MARAYOOR VILLAGE
PR. RAMACHANDRA MENON
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court