Allowed

Baby A.Y v. Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd.

Kerala HC8 Dec 2017RP/13/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a review petition filed by Baby A.Y. against an earlier order disposing of a writ petition via a concession on installment payments. The court held it was just and fair to reconsider the substantive aspects raised concerning the Chit Funds Act.

What did the court decide?

The review petition is allowed and the judgment in the writ petition is recalled for subsequent hearing.

Baby A.Y Vs Kerala State Financial… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017/17TH AGRAHAYANA, 1939

¶5

RP.No. 13 of 2017 (M)

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C).NO.38327/2016 DATED 01-12-2016.

¶7

PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

¶8

BABY A.Y., AGED 44 YEARS, S/O. YOHANNAN, AREECKAL HOUSE, NAYITHODE P.O., KALADY.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.N.K.MOHANLAL.

¶10

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1. KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD., REPRESENTED BY MANAGING DIRECTOR, THRISSUR.

¶12

2. SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), KSFE LTD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 18.

¶13

3. MANAGER, KSFE LTD, PERUMBAVOOR, BRANCH-II, PERUMBAVOOR - 682 040.

¶14

R1 & R3 BY SRI.SALIL NARAYANAN K.A., SC. R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.VINEETHA B.

¶15

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08-12-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

rs.

¶17

RP.No. 13 of 2017

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:-

¶20

ANNEXURE A1 COPY OF THE REPLY OBTAINED UNDER RTI ACT ISSUED BY PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, KSFE.

¶21

RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

rs.

SHAJI P. CHALY, J.

¶26

R.P.No.13 of 2017 in W.P.(C) No.38327 of 2016

¶27

Dated this the 8^th day of December, 2017

¶28

O R D E R

¶29

This is a petition filed by the petitioner seeking to review

¶30

the judgment dated 01.12.2016, contending that the issue raised by the petitioner in the writ petition with respect to Sec.64 and other provisions of the Chit Funds Act were not considered by this Court. Even though apparently from the terms of the judgment, it is evident that, the writ petition was disposed of, on the basis of the concession made by the petitioner seeking time to pay off the outstanding amounts in reasonable instalments, I am of the considered opinion that, it will be just, fair and proper to consider the other aspects of the matter raised by the petitioner in this review petition.

¶31

Therefore, the review petition is allowed, and the

¶32

judgment in the writ petition is recalled.

¶33

Post the writ petition for hearing on 14.12.2017.

Sd/-

SHAJI P. CHALY

JUDGE

St/08.12.2017

Baby A.Y v. Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Baby A.Y v. Kerala State Financial Enterprises 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

Jayakumar Vs Rishiraj Singh

Aiswarya Jayaram Vs State of Kerala

M/S.Nikunjam Construction Pvt.Ltd Vs State of Kerala

Ambily Sivankutty Vs Union of India

P. Saji Vs the State of Kerala

M/S.Golden Fork Restaurant & Catering Company Ltd. Vs the Managing Director, Vytila Mobility Hub Society