This judgment dismisses a review petition filed against an order relegating parties to a Civil Court regarding a property dispute where a status quo interim order existed. The Court held there was no error apparent on the face of the record.
The review petition was dismissed without granting any relief.
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 A.M.SHAFFIQUE
TUESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH 2013/21ST PHALGUNA 1934
RP.No. 208 of 2013 () IN WP(C).4003/2013
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C).4003/2013 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 15-02-2013
REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER: -----------------------------
DR.PRABHA RAJAN, P.R.S. GARDENS, PERISSERRY P.O., PULIYOOR, CHENGANNUR.
BY ADVS.SRI.T.P.PRADEEP SRI.P.K.SATHEES KUMAR
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1. PULIYOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PULIYOOR P.O. CHENGANNUR, ALAPPUZHA DIST-689510.
2. THE SECRETARY PULIYOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, PULIYOOR P.O., CHENGANNUR ALAPPUZHA DIST-689510.
3. RAJAMMA RADHAKRISHNAN KARTHIKA HOUSE, PERISSERRY P.O. PULIYOOR, CHENGANNUR-689121.
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-03-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
VK
A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J
R.P. NO. 208 OF 2013 IN W.P.(C). NO. 4003 OF 2013
Dated this the 12th day of March, 2013
ORDER
This review petition is filed against the judgment of this Court relegating the parties to the Civil Court. As per the averments in the writ petition, it is made clear that when Ext. P2 notice was issued by the 2nd respondent, the 3rd respondent filed a civil suit as O.S. No. 355/2012, before the Munsiff Court, Chenganuur and had obtained an interim order of status quo. In that view of the matter this Court had only directed the parties to move the Civil Court. The learned counsel for the review petitioner submits by virtue of judgment of this Court in Reghuvara Panicker R. v.
Secretary, Maranallur Grama Panchayat and Another
[2009(4) KHC 170], this Court had taken a view that pendency of the proceedings in a civil suit will not preclude the Panchayath authorities in exercising their statutory jurisdiction under the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. First
R.P. NO. 208 OF 2013
2
of all this judgment was not brought to the notice of this Court. Secondly, this is a case where the Civil Court had granted an interim order of status quo wherein the petitioner and the 3rd respondent are parties. In that view of the matter I do not think that this Court will be justified in interfering with the judgment. The review was filed raising a ground that the Panchayath is duty bound to proceed pursuant to Ext. P2 notice. Apparently, in view of order of status quo the parties will have to vacate said order before proceeding with such directions. The grounds raised in the Review Petition does not arise for consideration, as there is no error apparent on the face of record. Accordingly the same is dismissed.
Sd/- A.M. SHAFFIQUE JUDGE
DCS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the review petition disclosing a new ground established in Reghuvara Panicker R. v. Secretary, Maranallur Grama Panchayat and Another would warrant setting aside the earlier judgment relegatin
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Reghuvara Panicker R. v. Secretary, Maranallur Grama Panchayat and AnotherReferred¶20
Reghuvara Panicker R. v. Secretary, Maranallur Grama Panchayat and Another [2009(4) KHC 170]
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dr. Praba Rajan
Puliyoor Grama Panchayath
Secretary, Puliyoor Grama Panchayath
Rajamma Radhakrishnan
A.M. Shaffique
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
