Disposed

Thomas Samuel v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC7 Apr 2014RP/237/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Review Petition, the Kerala High Court corrected a typographical error regarding a survey number in a previous judgment, recalled the impugned order, restored the writ petition for reconsideration, and disposed of the review petition.

What did the court decide?

The judgment dated 31.10.2013 is recalled, the writ petition is restored for consideration, and the Review Petition stands disposed of.

Thomas Samuel Vs State of Kerala — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL 2014/17TH CHAITHRA, 1936

¶5

RP.No. 237 of 2014 (N) IN WP(C).6337/2013

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 6337/2013 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 31-10-2013

¶7

REVIEW PETITIONER(S):

¶8

THOMAS SAMUEL,

¶9

S/O.K.P SAMUEL, KAVUMPATTU HOUSE, EDAKKARA AMSOM, DESOM, P.O EDAKKARA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.M.K.CHANDRA MOHANDAS

¶11

RESPONDENT(S):

¶12

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

¶13

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM 676 505.

¶14

3. THE TAHSILDAR, ERNAD TALUK, MANJERI 676 123.

¶15

4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,VILLAGE OFFICE, MANJERI VILLAGE 676 123.

¶16

5. THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,CONVENOR, LOCAL LEVEL MONIRORING COMMITTEE, MINI CIVIL STATION,MANJERI 676 505.

¶17

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.V.K.RAFEEQ.

¶18

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-04-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

VPV

¶20

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶21

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

¶22

R.P.No.237 of 2014

¶23

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

¶24

Dated this the 7^th day of April, 2014

¶25

ORDER

¶26

The review petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved of the typographical error crept in the judgment delivered on 31.10.2013 in W.P.(C)No.6337 of 2013 particularly with regard

¶27

to the concerned survey number as incorporated in this writ petition. In place of the 'Survey No.69/7' in the writ petition it has been incorporated as 'Survey No.69/72' which in turn came to be incorporated in the judgment as well. This is sought to be corrected by filing the Review Petition.

¶28

Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.

¶29

Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court finds that the mistake with regard to the actual survey number is liable to be corrected.

¶30

In the said circumstance, the judgment dated 31.10.2013 is recalled.

¶31

Registry is directed to restore the writ petition for consideration tomorrow. Review Petition stands disposed of.

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE

¶34

vpv

Thomas Samuel v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thomas Samuel v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jamal K.K. Vs P.I.Sheik Pareeth

Saji George Vs P.I.Sheik Pareeth

Sabeena Vs James Rajakumar

Praveen Babu Vs D.T.S.Rao

N.O Jose Vs Debt Recovery Tribunal

Senior Manager, Punjab National Bank Vs Ratheesh