Sukhadev v. Vazhakandy Ramu
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court set aside an order dismissing a review application and refused the rejection of a plaint for non-payment of balance court fee, granting two weeks to remit the fee.
What did the court decide?
The impugned orders dismissing the review application and rejecting the plaint are set aside; two weeks time is granted to pay the balance court fee.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH
MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012/19TH BHADRA 1934
OP(C).No. 2773 of 2012 ()
IA.NO.297/2012 IN OS.266/2010 of SUB COURT, SULTHAN BATHERY
PETITIONERS/REVIEW PETITIONERS:
1. SUKHADEV, S/O.DAGUDU, AGED 40 YEARS ASHIRVAD HOUSE, PALLITHAZHE KALPETTA P.O., KALPETTA VILLAGE, VYTHIRI TALUK WAYANADU DISTRICT.
2. NEELIKANDI SHAJI N.K., S/O.KUNHAMMED HAJI NEELIKANDI HOUSE, KALPETTA P.O. KALPETTA VILLAGE VYTHIRI TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.JAJU BABU
SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an order dismissing a review application for non-payment of balance court fee should be set aside to dispose the lis on merits.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
SUKHADEV
- petitioner
NEELIKANDI SHAJI N.K.
- respondent
VAZHAKANDY RAMU
- respondent
P.J. SHYLAJA
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court