Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

T.MARIMUTHU D/O. THAYYAMMAL versus SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, SREE PANDARAVAKA LAND

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


T.MARIMUTHU D/O. THAYYAMMAL v. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, SREE PANDARAVAKA LAND - WP(C) No. 33438 of 2004(E) [2007] RD-KL 12257 (5 July 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 33438 of 2004(E)

1. T.MARIMUTHU D/O. THAYYAMMAL,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, SREE PANDARAVAKA LAND
... Respondent

2. R.S.VIJAYALAKSHMI

3. MR.K.M.MANI, HON'BLE REVENUE MINISTER,

For Petitioner :SRI.M.RAJASEKHARAN NAYAR

For Respondent :SRI.R.S.KALKURA

The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH

Dated :05/07/2007

O R D E R

KURIAN JOSEPH, J.

W.P. (C). NO. 33438 OF 2004

Dated this the 5th day of July, 2007.



J U D G M E N T

Petitioner approached this Court aggrieved by Exhibit P5 notice issued by the first respondent. Issue pertains to the request made by the second respondent for assignment of Government land.

2. It is the main contention of the petitioner that the request for assignment cannot be considered since the same is concluded by various judgments of various courts. Learned Government Pleader submits that it is not in respect of the concluded issue the enquiry is now made, but in respect of the area not covered by the judgment, for an extent of 890 square links.

3. Be that as it may. Since Exhibit P5 is only a notice, this Court need not go into all these questions at this stage. It will be open to the petitioner to approach the first respondent himself and convince him that the issues are not liable to be reopened in case they are covered by judgments. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of as follows. W.P. (C). 33438/04 2 Petitioner may submit her objections before the first respondent within a period of two months from today. Thereafter, the matter will be duly considered by the first respondent with notice to the petitioner and second respondent and appropriate speaking orders adverting to the contentions taken by the petitioner will be passed within another four months. The interim order dated 18.11.2004 will continue till such time.

KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE.

smp


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.