Prasad v. Shibu C
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court at Ernakulam closed a review petition in an electricity line drawal writ case. The court held that since no representation was filed by the petitioner within the given timeframe, no further consideration was required, and the review was dismissed.
What did the court decide?
Review petition closed due to non-filing of representation within the stipulated time.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE
WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF AUGUST 2016/9TH BHADRA, 1938
RP.No. 575 of 2016 ()
-------------------------------(AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C).NO. 19369/2016 DATED 06-06-2016)
REVIEW PETITIONER/5TH RESPONDENT.:
PRASAD.C, T.C 53/1039 (2), KAMAL, SATHYAN NAGAR, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE P.O, PAPPANAMCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADV. SRI.BASANT BALAJI
RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER/ RESPONDENTS:
1. SHIBU.C, S/O CHANDRAN PANICKER, T.C 51/1315(1), RAMANILAYAM, CHAVANICHIVILA, SATHYAN NAGAR, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE POST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695 124.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the review petition should be closed given that no representation was filed within the stipulated time despite objections to the line drawal.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Prasad.C
- respondent
Shibu.C
- respondent
District Collector & District Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram
- respondent
Additional District Magistrate, Collectorate, Thiruvananthapuram
- respondent
Chief Engineer, Kerala State Electricity Board
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court