A revision petition in a land dispute was dismissed as not pressed by the court after the petitioner filed a memo stating the dispute was settled and vacant possession was surrendered.
The revision petition was dismissed as not pressed.
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 K.T.SANKARAN &
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.D.RAJAN
THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2014/22ND KARTHIKA, 1936
RCRev..No. 325 of 2012 (D)
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN RCA.NO.14/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM DATED 31-03-2012
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN RCP.NO.23/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE RENT CONTROL COURT, ERNAKUJLAM, DATED 08-09-2009
REVISION PETITIONER/ RESPONDENT/ RESPONDENT:
MATHEW A.M., AGED 60 YEARS, S/O MATHAI, DOOR NO X/522, ANGEL FINANCIERS HOSPITAL JUNCTION, NEAR ST. GEORGE CHURCH ARAKUNNAM P.O, 682 313.
BY ADVS. SRI.ABRAHAM P.GEORGE SRI.K.VINODKUMAR (707/89) SMT.M.SANTHY
RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/ PATITIONER:
MANKA PAUL@ SARAMMA, AGED 70 YEARS, D/O PAUL AND W/O V.K. PHILIP. VETTIKKATTIL HOUSE ARAKUNNAM P.O, ERNAKULAM 682 313.
ADDITIONAL RESPONDENT IMPLEADED:
ADDITIONAL SECOND RESPONDENT IS IMPLEADED AS THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE RESPONDENT VIDE ORDER DATED 13.11.2014 IN I.A.NO.722 OF 2013.
R2 BY ADV. SRI.V.R.KESAVA KAIMAL
THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING ON 13-11-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
K.T.SANKARAN & P.D.RAJAN, JJ.
----------------------------------------------------
R.C.R. NO.325 OF 2012 (D)
---------------------------------------------------Dated this the 13th day of November, 2014
O R D E R
K.T.Sankaran, J.
A memo dated 9.10.2014 is filed by the revision petitioner stating that the disputes involved in the case have been settled out of Court and the petitioner has surrendered vacant possession of the petition scheduled building to the respondent/landlord. It is also stated that it is not necessary to prosecute the Revision further. Accordingly, the Rent Control Revision is dismissed as not pressed.
(K.T.SANKARAN) Judge
(P.D. RAJAN) Judge
ahz/
Mathew A.M.
Manka Paul@ Saramma
Biju Philip
K.T. Sankaran
P.D. Rajan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
