M.v.George v. a.J.George
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court disposed of a writ petition regarding timber removal. It held that the lower appellate court correctly rejected the plea as interlocutory but ordered record transmission to the trial court for fresh consideration on merits within a specified timeline.
What did the court decide?
Permitted petitioner to file an interlocutory application in the trial court for permission to remove timber subject to deposit, with orders to be passed within 4-6 weeks.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 13TH MAGHA, 1939
OP(C).No. 238 of 2018
OS 209/2016 OF MUNSIFF COURT, ALATHUR , PALAKKAD DISTRICT ------------------------
PETITIONER
M.V.GEORGE, AGED 56 YEARS, S/O. VARKEY, MAMBALATH HOUSE, KUTTAMANGALAM, KAINAKARI, AMBALAPUZHA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.
BY ADV.SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR
RESPONDENT:
A.J.GEORGE, S/O. JOHN, ALUNGAL HOUSE, KANIYAMANGALATH, ELAVAMPADAM DESOM, VANDAZHY VILLAGE, KIZHAKKANCHERY AMSOM, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the rejection of the petitioner's plea in the lower appellate court regarding permission to remove timber.
Whether the petitioner is permitted to seek relief through an interlocutory application before the trial court instead.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
M.V. George
- respondent
A.J. George
Coram
Alexander Thomas
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court