Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

VAZHIKKADAVU TOWN KSHEEROLPADAKA versus STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


VAZHIKKADAVU TOWN KSHEEROLPADAKA v. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY - WA No. 113 of 2004(B) [2007] RD-KL 12657 (10 July 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WA No. 113 of 2004(B)

1. VAZHIKKADAVU TOWN KSHEEROLPADAKA
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent

2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE

3. THE KERALA CO-OPERATIVE MILK MARKETING

4. MOTHER DAIRY FOODS LTD., REPRESENTED

5. THE MALABAR REGIONAL CO-OPERATIVE MILK

6. THE NATIONAL CO-OPERATIVE DAIRY

For Petitioner :SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR

For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.H.L.DATTU The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

Dated :10/07/2007

O R D E R

H.L.DATTU, C.J. & K.T.SANKARAN, J.

W.A.No.113 of 2004

Dated, this the 10th day of July, 2007



JUDGMENT

H.L.Dattu, C.J. Appellant is a milk society registered under the provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. The 5th respondent is also a milk co-operative society. The appellant and the 5th respondent are affiliated members of the third respondent Milk Marketing Federation (MILMA). The third respondent had entered into an arrangement with the 4th respondent in so far as marketing rights are concerned. Aggrieved by the said action, the appellant society was before this Court in O.P.No.14367 of 2003. In the original petition the appellant did not succeed. That is how they are before us in this appeal.

2. Mr.K.Anand, learned counsel appearing for respondents 3 and 5 in the appeal would inform us that the arrangement that was done by the 5th respondent with the 4th respondent was only for a period of one year and since that has expired the relief sought in the writ petition as well as in the writ appeal would not survive for consideration of this Court.

3. We do not doubt the assertion made by Sri.Anand, learned counsel appearing for respondents 3 and 5. Therefore, in our opinion, as on today the relief sought for by the appellant in this writ appeal would not survive for consideration of this Court. Accordingly the writ appeal is disposed of as having become unnecessary. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (K.T.SANKARAN)

JUDGE

vns


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.