Aadam v. Nafeesa.R.v
Case brief
What is this about?
This order allowed a petition challenging a Sub Court order that imposed Rs.20,000 costs for restoring a default-dismissed appeal. The High Court reduced the cost to Rs.5,000 deemed reasonable.
What did the court decide?
Petition allowed; Impugned order modified to reduce restoration cost from Rs.20,000 to Rs.5,000.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
TUESDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 18TH ASHADHA, 1941
OP(C).No.942 of 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN AS 90/2013 of SUB COURT, TIRUR
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OS 170/2011 of MUNSIFF COURT, PONNANI
PETITIONER:
AADAM
AGED 52 YEARS S/O. POONAKKATTU ABDUTTY, MUMTHAZ MANZIL, SOUTH ROAD, KOTTANPADI, KADAVANAD AMSOM DESOM, PONNANI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS. SRI.JAMSHEED HAFIZ SMT.T.S.SREEKUTTY
RESPONDENTS & 2ND RESPONDENT:
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the impugned order imposing costs of Rs.20,000/– for restoration of default-dismissed appeal was perverse and exceedingly high.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Aadam
- respondent
Nafeesa.R.V
Coram
Sunil Thomas
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court