T.J.ANTONY v. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED
Case at a glance
- Order date
- 18 Jan 2007
- Bench
- M M PAREED PILLAY, M R HARIHARAN NAIR
Judgment
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.PAREED PILLAY (RETD.CHIEF JUSTICE, HIGH COURT OF KERALA) & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.R.HARIHARAN NAIR (RETD.JUDGE, HIGH COURT OF KERALA) THURSDAY, THE 18TH JANUARY 2007 / 28TH PAUSHA 1928 WP(C).No. 6938 of 2005(A) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------
1. T.J.ANTONY, S/O.JOSEPH, THATTIL MANDI HOUSE, P.O.ANTHIKKAD.
2. REV.FR. LONAPPAN THATTIL, THATTIL MANDI HOUSE, P.O.ANTHIKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.M.D.SASIKUMARAN SRI.GEORGE MATHEW RESPONDENTS: -------------
STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY REVENUE, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
DY.THAHASILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, THRISSUR.
VILLAGE OFFICER, ANTHIKKAD.
THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD., KANJANI BRANCH REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.
M.T.SIJOSH, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.JOSE, MAKKATHU KULAM HOUSE, PAZHUVIL, THRISSUR. BY GOVT. PLEADER (FOR R1 TO R3) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR DETERMINATION AT THE LOK ADALATH AND THE PARTIES HAVING SETTLED THE MATTER, THE FOLLOWING AWARD IS PASSED IN TERMS OF THE SETTLEMENT: WP(C) NO.6938/2005/A -2- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT. P1: NOTICE DT. 26-04-2004 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT. P2: REPLY NOTICE ISSUED THROUGH LAWYER DTD.30.12.04. /TRUE COPY/ M.M.PAREED PILLAY (RETD. CHIEF JUSTICE) & M.R.HARIHARAN NAIR (RETD. JUDGE) W.P.(C) No. 6938 OF 2005(A) ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of January, 2007 A W A R D M.M.PAREED PILLAY (Rtd. Chief Justice) In view of the letter received from the 4th respondent-South Indian Bank to the effect that Mr.M.J.Sijosh has remitted the dues to the Bank availing OTS and that RR proceedings were stopped the Writ Petition stands closed. The letter of the Bank will form part of the record. M.M.PAREED PILLAY (RETD. CHIEF JUSTICE) M.R.HARIHARAN NAIR (RETD. JUDGE)
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.