Joseph K.V v. Asha Purushothaman
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court allowed the petitioner's petition under Article 227 to reformulate a fresh application regarding boundary fixation, permitting withdrawal of an earlier defective application.
What did the court decide?
Pending application dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh application within one week; trial court directed to consider it within three weeks.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS FRIDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 18TH PHALGUNA, 1939
OP(C).No. 620 of 2018
PETITIONER:
JOSEPH K.V, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O. VARGHESE, KODIYAN HOUSE, KANJIRAMATOM DESOM, AMBALUR VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682 315.
BY ADVS.SRI.M.S.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.JITHIN PAUL VARGHESE SRI.K.SUNIL SMT.A.G.NISHA SMT.M.ARDRA KRISHNAN
RESPONDENT(S):
ASHA PURUSHOTHAMAN, AGED 47 YEARS, W/O. PURUSHOTHAMAN, XVI/43 MARANGATTUPARAMBIL, KANJIRAMATTOM DESOM, AMBALLUR VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682 315.
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
PBS
OP(C).No. 620 of 2018 (O)
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to withdraw a previously filed application to file a fresh one regarding boundary fixation.
Whether the trial court should remit the commissioner's report to comply with earlier order directions.
Whether the appeal order modifying the rejection of the application is maintainable under Article 227.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Joseph K.V
- respondent
Asha Purushothaman
Coram
Alexander Thomas
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court