Dismissed

Fragrant Nature, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC29 Mar 2023WP(C)/5221/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court dismissed W.P.(C) No. 5221 of 2022 as withdrawn. The court clarified that the withdrawal would not be recorded as based on a settlement and that any pending or contemplated proceedings against the petitioner may continue in accordance with law.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed as withdrawn; clarified that withdrawal is not on basis of settlement and pending proceedings may continue.

Fragrant Nature, Vs State of Kerala — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 29^TH DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 8TH CHAITHRA, 1945

¶5

WP(C) NO. 5221 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

FRAGRANT NATURE, BISON VALLEY ROAD, POTHANMEDU, MUNNAR, KERALA-685612, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, SAJEESH K., AGED 46 YEARS, S/O. P.K. KURUP, RESIDING AT KOTTINATTU HOUSE, VARAVILA P.O., VAVAKAVU VIA, KOLLAM-690528. BY ADVS. SAIBY JOSE KIDANGOOR BENNY ANTONY PAREL ANOOP SEBASTIAN PRAMITHA AUGUSTINE IRINE MATHEW ADITHYA KIRAN V.E ANJALI NAIR

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, TRIVANDRUM-695001. 2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI DISTRICT, COLLECTORATE, IDUKKI, KUYILIMALA, KERALA-685603. 3 THE TAHSILDAR, DEVIKULAM, DEVIKULAM CIRCULAR ROAD, DEVIKULAM-685613. 4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PALLIASAL VILLAGE. KANAN DEVN HILLS, KERALA-685561. SRI. JAFFAR KHAN -SR.G.P.

¶10

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.03.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.P.(C)No.5221/2022

JUDGMENT

The petitioner has filed a 'not press memo' in the writ petition. The learned Senior Government Pleader would submit that there is no settlement of the issues as stated in the 'not press memo' filed in the writ petition. He submits that while the State has no objection in the writ petition being withdrawn, it may not be recorded that the writ petition is being withdrawn on the basis of settlement. He also prays that it may be clarified that pending proceedings, if any, can be continued against the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶15

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn making it clear that the proceedings, if any, pending or contemplated against the petitioner, may continue in accordance with law.

¶16

sd/GOPINATH P. JUDGE

acd

W.P.(C)No.5221/2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5221/2022

¶21

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶22

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE NO. FILE NO.5057701/56/2022 DATED 11/02/2022 OF THE BUILDING OF THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE OCCUPANCY CERTIFICATE DATED 17/02/2016 ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT NO.4693979 DATED 18/11/2020 FOR THE PERIOD 2020-21 REMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 1/02/2022 ALONG WITH THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT.

Fragrant Nature, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Fragrant Nature, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shaji Madhavan Vs Taluk Surveyor

George Varghese Vs Kumplampoika Service Co-Operative Bank Represented by Secretary

Muhammad Rafeeq Vs Assistant Registrar of Co-Op. Societies (Genaral)

Terin Alex Vs the Kerala State Co-Operative Bank Ltd.(Kerala Bank), Represented by the Authorised Officer

Ben Joseph Koshy Vs The Federal Bank Ltd.

Jossy Sunny Vs State of Kerala