Seru v. District Collector
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court rejected the petitioners' claim for 50% compensation release, finding the dispute under the compromise decree was still subsisting and no father was a party, hence it is inappropriate to direct release of funds.
What did the court decide?
The writ petition was closed, reserving liberty to raise contentions before the officer concerned.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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 V.G.ARUN
WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 25TH JYAISHTA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 9841 OF 2021
PETITIONERS:
1 SERU
AGED 22 YEARS S/O.RAVEENDRAN, S.R.J.VILLA, VILAPPILSALA P.O., VILAPPIL VILLAGE, KATTAKKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
- 2 ZECHARIA R. AGED 21 YEARS
- S/O.RAVEENDRAN, S.R.J.VILLA, VILAPPILSALA P.O., VILAPPIL VILLAGE, KATTAKKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
- 3 SUJAMOL AGED 19 YEARS D/O.RAVEENDRAN, S.R.J.VILLA, VILAPPILSALA P.O., VILAPPIL VILLAGE, KATTAKKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV LATHEESH SEBASTIAN
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Court can direct release of compensation under a settlement when the dispute remains subsisting and the father is not a party.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
SERU AND ORS.
- respondent
DISTRICT COLLECTOR CIVIL STATION, KUDAPPANAKUNNU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
- respondent
LATHA
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court