Disposed

Vijayalakshmi v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC6 Aug 2012Crl.MC/2662/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that since only an appeal lies against the impugned orders under the relevant conservation act and not a revision, the criminal revision was not maintainable. The court directed the Sessions Judge to return the revision petition for the petitioner to prefer an appeal within two weeks, with the revision period counted for limitation purposes if an appeal is filed within the stip

What did the court decide?

The Sessions Judge directed to return the revision memorandum; petitioner directed to file an appeal within two weeks, with revision period counted for limitation if appeal filed.

Vijayalakshmi Vs the State of Kerala — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST 2012/15TH SRAVANA 1934

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 2662 of 2012 (C)

¶6

-------------------------IN CRRP.59/2012 of D.C. & SESSIONS COURT,THRISSUR

¶7

PETITIONER / PETITIONER : -

¶8

VIJAYALAKSHMI, W/O.SADASIVAN, POONNARASSERY HOUSE, ORUMANAYOOR P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR

¶10

RESPONDENT / RESPONDENT : -

¶11

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 31, THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, GURUVAYOOR POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.R. REMA.

¶13

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06-08-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

Crl.MC.No. 2662 of 2012 (C)

¶15

APPENDIX

¶16

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES :

¶17

ANNEXURE A : COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR DATED 22.05.2012 AS NO.B3-19525/2012.

¶18

ANNEXURE B : COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE COURT OF SESSION, THRISSUR IN Crl. M.P. NO.1520/2012 IN Crl. R.P. NO.59/2012 DATED 20.06.2012.

¶19

RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES : NIL.

// TRUE COPY //

P.A. TO JUDGE

DMR/-

S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN,J.

¶24

Crl.M.C. NO. 2662 of 2012

¶25

Dated this the 06^th day of August, 2012

¶26

ORDER

¶27

Challenge in the petition invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this court under Section 482 of the Code is against Annexure B order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Thrissur, in a criminal revision arising from a proceeding under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land Wetland Act, 2008. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner fairly submitted that as against the order challenged in revision, in terms of Section 21 of the aforesaid Act, only an appeal will lie, but, inadvertently a revision has been filed. The order passed on an interlocutory application in that revision, Annexure B, is challenged in this petition. Petitioner has necessarily to raise the challenge against the order impugned in the revision by way of an appeal as provided by the statute, where no criminal revision is entertainable against such order. The learned Sessions Judge is directed to retur n

¶28

Crl.M.C. NO. 2662 of 2012 2

¶29

the memorandum of revision with the order impugned, to enable the petitioner to prefer an appeal as provided under Section 21 of the Act, in case an application is moved for that purpose within two weeks from today. It is also made clear if within such time limit an application is moved by the petitioner and an appeal is preferred within next one week the period during which he prosecuted the revision shall be taken note of, for condoning the delay in filing the appeal under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, as there is reason to indicate that the petitioner has not been prosecuting the revision not bonafide .

¶30

Subject to the above observations/directions, the petition is disposed of.

¶31

Hand over a copy of this order to the counsel for the petitioner.

¶32

S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE.

¶33

DMR /-

Vijayalakshmi v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijayalakshmi v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sajan.K.Varghese Vs C.L.Dileep

Mohammed Ali Vs Maryiammath Minaz

Muhammed Babu Vs Najeeb

Ashraf S/O.Hamza Haji Vs State of Kerala

State of Kerala Vs Swami Amrutha Chithanya @ Santoh Madhavan

Anil Kumar Y Vs State of Kerala