Allowed

Ushadevi @ Usha Nair v. Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd.

Kerala HC9 Jan 2017OP(C)/490/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition challenges the dismissal of interim applications for amendment and appointment of an advocate commissioner in an election petition. The High Court allowed the applications on terms, directing the petitioners to pay consolidated costs.

What did the court decide?

Allowed amendment and appointment of advocate commissioner on payment of consolidated costs of Rs.2,000.

Ushadevi @ Usha Nair Vs Power Grid… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

MONDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY 2017/19TH POUSHA, 1938

¶5

OP(C).No. 490 of 2016 (O)

¶6

OP(ELEC.) 127/2005 OF 1ST ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, KOLLAM.

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS:

¶8

1. USHADEVI @ USHA NAIR, USHA BHAVANAM, PATTAZHI VADAKKEKKARA MURI, PATTAZHI VILLAGE.

¶9

2. MADHUSOODANAM PILLAI, USHA BHAVANAM, PATTAZHI VADAKKEKKARA MURI, PATTAZHI VILLAGE.

¶10

3. ASWANI KRISHNA, USHA BHAVANAM, PATTAZHI VADAKKEKKARA MURI, PATTAZHI VILLAGE

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.V.K.PEERMOHAMED KHAN

¶12

RESPONDENT(S):

¶13

1. POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD., NAYYARKULANGARA, ALAPPUZHA - 690013, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶14

2. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD., HARIPPAD, ALAPPUZHA - 690514.

¶15

BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI

¶16

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09-01-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

mbr/

¶18

OP(C).No. 490 of 2016 (O)

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶21

P1:	TRUE COPY THE PETITI	OF THE APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT FILED BY ONERS AS IA.NO.1900/2015 DATED 22.9.2015.
P2:	TRUE COPY COMMISSION IA.NO.1901	OF THE APPLICATION FOR APPOINTING ADVOCATE ER FILED BY THE PETITIONERS AS /2015 DATED 22.9.2015.
P3:	TRUE COPY	OF THE ORDER IN IA.NO.1900/2015 IN
	OP (ELEC)	NO.127/2015 DATED 3.11.2015.
P4:	TRUE COPY OP.(ELEC)	OF THE ORDER IN IA.NO.1901/2015 IN NO.127/2015 DATED 3.11.2015.

¶22

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL.

¶23

//TRUE COPY//

¶24

P.S. TO JUDGE mbr/

¶25

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

¶26

========================= O.P.(C).No.490/2016

¶27

¶28

The petitioners are respectively, petitioners 2, 4

¶29

and 5 in O.P.(Elec) No.127 of 2005 on the file of the court of the First Additional District Judge, Kollam. In the above petition, they filed applications to amend the petition and to appoint an advocate commissioner. I.A.No.1900 of 2015 is the application to amend the petition and I.A.No.1901 of 2015 is the application to appoint advocate commissioner. Both the applications stand dismissed by Exts.P3 and P4 orders. It is challenging Exts.P3 and P4 orders, they have approached this court.

¶30

The main reason for the dismissal of I.A.No.1900 of 2015 is that there is no basis on which enhancement of claim made and the reason for the delay

¶31

OPC 490/2016

¶32

-:2:-

¶33

are not disclosed and further that the petition was posted for evidence and the petitioner has filed proof affidavit. It is true that there was delay in the matter. However, delay itself cannot frustrate relief to the petitioners.

¶34

Therefore, considering the facts and

¶35

circumstances, this court is of the view that the applications are to be allowed. However, this shall be on terms. The petitioners shall pay consolidated costs of Rs.2,000/(Rupees two thousand only) to the counsel appearing for the respondents in this court within two weeks and on production of receipt, the applications shall stand allowed and the court below shall proceed further in accordance with the case in accordance with law, if necessary, giving opportunity to the respondents to file additional written statement.

¶36

The original petition is disposed of as above.

¶37

Sd/-

¶38

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE

¶39

Ushadevi @ Usha Nair v. Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ushadevi @ Usha Nair v. Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gopinathan Nair Vs Mariyamma

M/S. Sree Gokulam Chits and Finance Co. (P) Ltd. Vs v.Sundaresan

Rincy Vs Sobhana

Rinto Vs John

Laila Vs Naseer

K.S Lakshmanan Nair, Vs Stephen Joseph