Dismissed
Hari v. State of Kerala
Kerala HCWP(C)/17913/2005
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT :…
What the court decided
AI extract
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 P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
MONDAY, THE 30TH AUGUST 2010 / 8TH BHADRA 1932
WP(C).No. 17913 of 2005(G)
--------------------------
PETITIONERS:
BY ADV. SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY
RESPONDENTS:
R1 AND R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. A. J VARGHESE R3 BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
W.P.(C) No. 17913 OF 2005
Dated this the 30th September, 2010
J U D G M E N T
The petitioners have approached this Court with the
following prayers:
i) to issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction to call for the records leading to Ext. P5 recovery of the loan amount by the 3rd respondent and to quash the same;
ii) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to appoint experts in assessing the building damage of the petitioners' residential building which was hit by Tsunami and calculate the quantum of damages reasonably incurred to the petitioners and to compensate the same within a time limit;
iii) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing
W.P.(C) No. 17913 OF 2005
2
the 2nd respondent to award compensation to the damage caused to the petitioners' residential building, lumpsum and till that time the 2nd respondent may direct the 3rd respondent to keep in abeyance all the recovery steps of the loan amount, especially when there is morotorium declared by the Government;
iv) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the first and 2nd respondents to award compensation for the loss of cable T.V. net work programme carrying out by the petitioners, in the light of the report of the Industrial Officer, Karunagapally, within time limit;
And
v) to issue such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court shall deem just and proper in the circumstances of the case. “
3
W.P.(C) No. 17913 OF 2005
misconceived as no damage had been caused to the petitioners during Tsunami occurred on 26.12.2004.
There is no representation for the petitioners. It appears that the petitioners are no more interested in the cause of action. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed for default.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.
lk
W.P.(C) No. 17913 OF 2005
4
HARI S/O.V.PURUSHOTHAMAN
ZEENA
STATE OF KERALA
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM
THE STATE BANK OF INDIA
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court