The High Court of Kerala allowed a review petition seeking recall of an order passed in an earlier writ petition. The prior judgment was set aside because it was based on an incorrect assumption of facts concerning the status of land revenue proceedings.
Review petition allowed; judgment dated 29.6.2017 in W.P.(C) No.21481 of 2017 recalled.
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.B.SURESH KUMAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST 2017/11TH SRAVANA, 1939
RP.No. 658 of 2017 ()
JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 21481/2017 DATED 29-06-2017.
REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER:
BEERAN HAJI, S/O.SATHALAVI, CHEMMALA HOUSE, CHEERAKKUZHI, VALLIKUTH P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.R.RANJITH (MANJERI)
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:
THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, LAND TRIBUNAL, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676 121.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.S.KANNAN
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02-08-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
mbr/
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
R.P.No.658 of 2017
in
W.P.(C).No.21481 of 2017-I.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 2nd day of August, 2017.
O R D E R
The petitioner seeks review of the judgment. The grievance voiced by the petitioner in the writ petition was that though Ext.P1 order was passed in a suo moto proceedings initiated under the Kerala Land Reforms Act in respect of the property in his possession as early as on 25.7.2014, the purchase certificate has not been issued pursuant to Ext.P1 order. It is seen that while disposing of the writ petition, this Court was proceeding on the assumption that the proceedings are yet to be over, and consequently, it was directed that the proceedings shall be finalised. In so far as the writ petition was disposed of on an incorrect assumption of facts, the judgment is liable to be recalled.
In the result, the review petition is allowed and the
RP.No.658/2017 in WP.(C).No.21481/2017-I.
2
judgment dated 29.6.2017 in W.P.(C) No.21481 of 2017 is
recalled.
Sd/-
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.
Kvs/-
// true copy //
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the judgment in W.P.(C) No.21481 of 2017 was passed on an incorrect assumption of facts regarding the finality of proceedings?
Beeran Haji
The Special Tahsildar, Land Tribunal, Manjeri
P.B.Suresh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
