Cheriyan v. Wilson
Case brief
What is this about?
This review petition challenged the disposal of a second appeal where the respondent had transferred the disputed property during pendency. The court held that the original owner retains the right to continue litigation and confirmed the review was devoid of merit.
What did the court decide?
The review petition was dismissed on the ground of no error apparent on the face of the record regarding the respondent's locus standi.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH
MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JUNE 2012/4TH ASHADHA 1934
RP.No. 494 of 2012 () IN RSA.374/2005
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN RSA.374/2005 DATED 02-04-2012
REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF:
CHERIYAN S/O. KALATHIL VEETIL ISSAC CHERIYAN CHELAKKARA VILLAGE, TALAPPILLY TALUK.
BY ADV. SHRI N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SR.) BY ADV. SRI.S.SUJIN
RESPONDENT(S)/APPELLANT/APPELLANT/DEFENDANT:
WILSON S/O. KOLADI CHUMMAR, KANIYARKODE VILLAGE, TALAPPILLY TALUK, REPRESENTED THROUGH POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER VAREED S/O. CHUMMAR, KOLADY HOUSE, THIRUVILLWAMALA, THRISSUR, PIN - 680001.
BY ADV. SHRI G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether transfer of property pendente lite deprives the original litigant of the right to continue the appeal without impleading the assignee.
Whether a review petition is maintainable on the ground of lack of locus standi due to transfer of property pending suit.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Cheriyan
- respondent
Wilson
Coram
Thomas P. Joseph
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court