R.Thankamma v. Dharma Ammal
Case brief
What is this about?
COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE…
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 V.CHITAMBARESH
WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012/21ST BHADRA 1934
CRP.No. 496 of 2000 (D)
AA.270/1998 of APPELLATE AUTHORITY (LR), ALAPPUZHA OA.365/1978 of LAND TRIBUNAL, TRIVANDRUM
REVISION PETITIONER:
R.THANKAMMA,W/O. GURU SWAMY KAMBAR, TC NO. 38/468 AND 38/469 (OLD TC NO.35/504) TRIVANDRUM * DIED
*** ADDL. PETITIONERS 2 AND 3 IMPLEADED.**
2. K.SAJI, S/O KRISHNA PILLAI, AGED 37, T.C. MO. 38/468-469
POWER HOUSE ROAD, CHENTHITTA, TRIVANDRUM
3. S. THANKAMONY, W/O. SRI.K. SAJI, AGED 23, RESIDING AT DO. DO.
ADDL. REV.PETITIONERS 2 AND 3 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 12-9-2012 IN I.A. NO.626/2006 IN C.R.P NO.496/2000
BY ADV. SRI.G.S.REGHUNATH
RESPONDENT(S):
1. DHARMA AMMAL, W/O. SRI. RAMASWAMY, ALIYIRI SWAMISALA,
MADRAS STATIC FROM TC NO.38/220, CHENTHITTA TRIVANDRUM
2. MANGALAM RAJARAMAN OF DO. DO.
3. R.N. MOORTHY, OF DO.DO.
4. N.SARASWATHY OF DO.DO.
5. A.N MURALI OF DO. DO.
BY ADV. SRI.T.K.VENUGOPALAN BY ADV. SRI.SHIBU JOSEPH
THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12-092012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
V.CHITAMBARESH,J.
= = = = = = = = = = =
C.R.P No.496 of 2000
= = = = = = = = = = = == = = = =
Dated this the 12th day of September, 2012
O R D E R
The Civil Revision Petition is permitted to be withdrawn as
sought by the petitioner.
V.CHITAMBARESH. JUDGE
smm
2
R.THANKAMMA, W/O. GURU SWAMY KAMBAR; K.SAJI, S/O KRISHNA PILLAI; S. THANKAMONY, W/O. SRI.K. SAJI
DHARMA AMMAL, W/O. SRI. RAMASWAMY
MANGALAM RAJARAMAN
R.N. MOORTHY
N.SARASWATHY
A.N MURALI
V.CHITAMBARESH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court