The court dismissed the writ appeal and the application for condonation of delay in limine, finding no justification to entertain the appeal against an interim order made by a single judge.
The writ appeal and the application to condone the delay are dismissed in limine.
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.N.RAVINDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
MONDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017/22ND KARTHIKA, 1939
WA.No. 2191 of 2017 () IN WP(C).20637/2017
AGAINST THE ORDER IN WP(C) 20637/2017 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 2108-2017
APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER IN WP(C):
K.M.MARY ALIAS MARY GEORGE
NEELANKAL HOUSE, PIRAVOM P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,PIN 686 664
BY ADVS.SMT.ELIZABETH MATHAI IDICULLA SRI.RACHEL JOSEPH SRI.MOHAN IDICULLA ABRAHAM SRI.MARTIN D.ALUMKARA
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT IN W.P(C): -----------------------------------
POWER GRID CORPORATION LTD. REPRESENTED BY ITS C.A.O PLOT NO 190-B,MAVELIPURAM COLONY KAKKANAD, KOCHI PIN 682 030
R BY SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13-11-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
P.N. Ravindran &
Devan Ramachandran, JJ.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - -
C.M.Appl.No.1317 of 2017 and W.A.No.2191 of 2017
- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 13th November, 2017
JUDGMENT
P.N.Ravindran, J.
This writ appeal arises from the interim order passed by a learned single judge of this court on 21.8.2017 in W.P.(C) No.20637 of 2017. The appellant is the petitioner in the said writ petition. The said interim order is one passed in seven other cases as well.
It is not in dispute that the petitioners in W.P.(C) Nos.34264 of 2016 and 25934 of 2017 had filed writ appeals challenging the very same order, but the said writ appeals were not entertained and were dismissed in-limine.
In such circumstances, we find no reason or justification to condone the delay in filing the appeal and to entertain the appeal. The writ appeal and the application to condone the delay are consequently dismissed.
(P.N. Ravindran, Judge)
(Devan Ramachandran, Judge)
kav/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ appeal and the application to condone the delay in filing the appeal should be entertained.
K.M.Mary Alias Mary George
Power Grid Corporation Ltd.
P.N.Ravindran
Devan Ramachandran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
