V.Amudini v. Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram
Case brief
What is this about?
Single-day order dismissing the writ petition as infructuous on the ground that there was no representation to the petitioner and the matter had become stale thereafter.
Single-day order dismissing the writ petition as infructuous on the ground that there was no representation to the petitioner and the matter had become stale thereafter.
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.HARILAL
THURSDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/28TH KARTHIKA, 1937
WP(C).NO. 9181 OF 2012 (W) ---------------------------
PETITIONER:
V.AMUDINI, AGED 52 YEARS, D/O. VASUMATHI, TC 30/810 & 30/812, PROPRIETOR, DEVI FAST FOOD, PUTHEN ROAD, PETTAH P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.S.V.RAJAN SRI.R.SUDHISH SMT.M.MANJU SMT.V.P.GEETHA KUMARY SRI.K.R.RANJITH SMT.SHIBI. K.P.
RESPONDENT(S):
---------------
1. CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033.
2. REVENUE INSPECTOR PETTAH WARD, CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 033. 3. S.VIDYADHARAN ,
(REVENUE INSPECTOR, PETTAH WARD), TC 31/1065, V.V.BHAVAN, AKSHARA VEEDHI ROAD, PETTAH P.O., PARAKKUDI LANE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 024.
R1,R2 BY ADV. SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON (SR.) R1,R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR R3 BY ADV. SRI.N.KRISHNA PRASAD R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.RAVINDRA NATH BY SRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19-11-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
DST
K. HARILAL, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P. (C) No.9181 of 2012
- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 19th day of November, 2015
J U D G M E N T
The learned counsel for the 1st respondent submits
that the matter in issue involved in this Writ Petition relates to the period from 2011 to 2013 only and thereafter, the same has become infructuous. There is no representation for the petitioner.
Hence, the Writ Petition will stand dismissed as infructuous.
Sd/- K. HARILAL,
JUDGE
DST
//True copy//
P.A. To Judge
V.AMUDINI
CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
REVENUE INSPECTOR PETTAH WARD
S.VIDYADHARAN
K. HARILAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court