Wpc No. 21727 of 2012 · Kerala High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
With the above clarification this ReviewPetition is dismissed
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. This is a judgment that was dictated in the openCourt in the presence of the counsel for the petitioners. Itwas not pointed out at that time that there was anymistake in the said statement. In fact, the said statementhas only recorded the submission of…
Judgment
K.SURENDRA MOHAN,J.---------------------------------------------Review Petition No.1020 of 2012----------------------------------------------Dated this the 14th day of November, 2012
O R D E RThis review petition seeks the correction of astatement in the judgment dated 19.09.2012, which readsas follows: It is pointed out by the learned counsel for thepetitioners that the 2nd respondent has a duty under theprovisions of the Act to cut and remove branches oftrees that are dangerously overhanging a neighbour'sproperty.
According to the counsel, what he hadsubmitted was that the entire tree should be cut andremoved and not its branches.
Operative part
This is a judgment that was dictated in the openCourt in the presence of the counsel for the petitioners. Itwas not pointed out at that time that there was anymistake in the said statement. In fact, the said statementhas only recorded the submission of the learned counsel R.P.No. 1020 of 2012 : 2 :for the petitioner. The same is neither an observation ofthe Court nor a concession made by the counsel. I am notsatisfied that the judgment suffers from any errorapparent on the face of the record justifying a reviewthereof. The relief granted in the said writ petition is onlya direction to the second respondent therein, to considerthe complaint of the petitioners and to pass appropriateorders thereon, in accordance with law. Since I have notmade any observations or findings on the merits norconsidered any of the contentions advanced by any of theparties, the said statement made in the judgment neednot fetter the arms of the second respondent whileconsidering and passing final orders on the complaint ofthe petitioners. With the above clarification this ReviewPetition is dismissed. Sd/-K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGEkkj
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.