IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA No. 677 of 2005()
1. JOSEPH, S/O. JOSEPH,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. MANAGER,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE
For Respondent :SRI.A.R.GEORGE
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.JOHN MATHEW (RETD.JUDGE)
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.R.HARIHARAN NAIR (RETD.JUDGE)
Dated :24/07/2007
O R D E R
JUSTICE P.K.SHAMSUDDIN (RETD. JUDGE, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA) &
JUSTICE M.R.HARIHARAN NAIR (RETD. JUDGE, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA)
M.A.C.A. No.677 of 2005
---------------------------
Dated this the 24th day of July, 2007
AWARD
Heard the counsel for the appellant and counsel for the respondent.
It is finally agreed that the appellant/claimant will be entitled to get an
additional amount of Rs.17,500/-(Rupees Seventeen thousand and five
hundred only) as compensation. This amount will be deposited before the
MACT, Thalassery within 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this
award, failing which the amount will carry interest at the rate of 9% per
annum from the date of default till payment. On payment of the amount the
appellant will be entitled to withdraw the amount from the Tribunal.
Appeal is disposed of as above.
P.K.SHAMSUDDIN
(RETD. JUDGE, HIGH COURT OF KERALA)
M.R.HARIHARAN NAIR
(RETD. JUDGE, HIGH COURT OF KERALA)
jp
? IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
+WP(C) No. 11284 of 2004(R)
#1. SUNIL KUMAR.S., AGED 53 YEARS, S/O.
... Petitioner
Vs
$1. K.S.NARAYANAN, T.C.NO.26/1901,
... Respondent
2. K.R.SABU, T.C.NO.26/1901, G.P.O.LANE,
! For Petitioner :SRI.AMEER.K.M.
^ For Respondent :SRI.R.S.KALKURA
*Coram
The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
% Dated :15/06/2007
: O R D E R
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J.
——————————-
W.P.(C) No. 11284 OF 2004
———————————–
Dated this the 15th day of June, 2007
JUDGMENT
This Writ Petition is filed by a person who claims to be in
possession of a shop room in respect of which the Rent Control Court
passed an order of eviction, seeking an order of stay in respect of
eviction proceedings. Even at the time of admission this court was not
inclined to grant stay. The respondents entered appearance and filed a
detailed counter affidavit producing documents which will show that they
are attempting to take possession of the shop room only on the strength
of eviction orders duly passed by the authorities of the Rent Control Act.
The parties were heard after the filing of the counter affidavit and again
this court was not inclined to grant stay. This writ petition has obviously
become infructuous. No representation for any of the parties. This Writ
Petition will stand dismissed.
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE
btt
WPC 2