Dismissed
C.D.Thankachan v. C.D.Joseph
Kerala HCRP/160/2005
Case brief
AI extract
What is this about?
The petitioners, legal heirs of the sole respondent (who had died), were held unable to maintain a review petition as no respondent existed to oppose it. The review was dismissed accordingly.
What did the court decide?
Review petition not allowed as the sole respondent was deceased and no respondent remained.
What the court decided
AI extract
¶1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
¶2
PRESENT
¶3
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN
¶4
WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 22ND POUSHA, 1943
¶5
RP NO. 160 OF 2005
¶6
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN AS 701/1997 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE IN OS 221/1979 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB
COURT,KOZHIKODE
¶7
REVIEW PETITIONER/RESPONDENTS:
¶8
1 C.D.THANKACHAN, S/O C.R.DAMIAN, KALAMASSERY VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
¶9
2 MACBEL DAMIAN, W/O.DAMIAN (DIED).
¶10
3 MARY JOSEPH, D/O.LATE C.R.DAMIAN, SARDAR NAGAR, BOMBAY.
¶11
4 RITA JOSLIN, D/O.C.R.DAMIAN, KITHA VALAPPIL HOUSE, BEACH ROAD, CALICUT.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
AI extract
Whether legal heirs of a deceased sole respondent in a review petition can maintain the petition without resurrecting a personal representative.
Parties & counsel
AI extract
- petitioner
C.D.Thankachan and 4 ors.
- respondent
C.D.Joseph
Coram
AI extract
P. SOMARAJAN
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court