Mohanan v. State of Kerala
Case brief
What is this about?
This order reviews a judgment in a writ petition concerning alleged illegal construction by a third respondent. The court, noting the writ petition was not disposed of on merits, instructs the municipality to consider civil court judgments in future similar constructions before the review petition is disposed of.
What did the court decide?
Directing the Municipality to consider Annexures 3 and 4 (civil court judgments) in any future construction matters concerning the petitioner before the review petition is finally disposed of.
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 MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
TUESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 4TH MAGHA, 1944
RP NO. 639 OF 2012
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.04.2012 IN WPC NO.6877/2012 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONER/3RD RESPONDENT:
1MOHANAN
S/O. KESAVAN, THACHILATHU HOUSE,
MARADU P. O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
PIN – 682 304.
*ADDL.KANNAN T. M.
REVIEWAGED 39 YEARS,
PETITIONER S/O. MOHANAN, THACHILATHU HOUSE,
2
MARADU P. O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
PIN – 682 304.
*ADDL.SMITHA T. M.
REVIEWAGED 41 YEARS, D/O. MOHANAN,
PETITIONER THACHILATHU HOUSE, MARADU P. O.,
3
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 682 304.
*ADDL.PRASAD T. M.
REVIEWAGED 38 YEARS, S/O. MOHANAN,
PETITIONER THACHILATHU HOUSE,
4
MARADU P. O.,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
PIN – 682 304.
*ADDL.REVIEW PETITIONERS 2 TO 4 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER
ORDER DATED 09.01.2023 IN IA 1/2022.
BY ADVS.
SRI. JOHNSON P. JOHN
SRI. M.K. SHASHI KUMAR
SRI. K.J. WILSON
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the order reserving liberty to the writ petitioner in an earlier judgment would prejudice the review petitioner.
Whether the civil court judgments should be considered by the municipality in future construction matters.
Whether the review petition should be disposed of and what instructions should be given to the municipality.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Mohanan
- intervenor
Petitioner S/O. Mohanan
- intervenor
Petitioner D/O. Mohanan
- intervenor
Petitioner S/O. Mohanan
- respondent
State of Kerala
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court