IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 24268 of 2009(C)
1. MANOHARAN
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA AND ANR.
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.T.B.THANKAPPAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
Dated :25/08/2009
O R D E R
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.
````````````````````````````````````````````````````
W.P(C) No. 24268 OF 2009 C
````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Dated this the 25th day of August, 2009
J U D G M E N T
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner,
Adv.Sri.G.S.Reghunath on behalf of the 2nd respondent and
learned Government Pleader.
2. Petitioner is the claimant in L.A.R.28/06 of the Sub
Court, Ernakulam. The reference court passed award in that case.
It is stated that there was an appeal against that award. The
requisitioning authority was also in the High Court. The
Government’s appeal L.A.1790/07 was dismissed by this court as
per Ext.P2 judgment on 17.7.2008.
3. Though an earlier E.P. as E.P.No.382/07 stood
dismissed, as stated by the petitioner, for non prosecution, he filed
E.P.494/08, after this court dismissed the L.A. Appeal. The
dismissal of that appeal was also stated in E.P.494/08. It is stated
that the copy of the judgment of this court was also produced
WPC.24268/09
: 2 :
before the court below. However, the court below has issued
Ext.P4 dismissing the cheque application to the extent of 50% of
the amount in deposit on the ground that the order of stay
regulates the deposit and confines the direction to release only
50%. That state of affairs has changed. May be that the cheque
application was filed in E.P.382/07 and not in E.P.494/08. But the
matters are crystal clear. The impugned Ext.P4 to the extent it is
against the petitioner is quashed and it is directed that on a fresh
cheque application to be filed in E.P.494/08, the court below will
take up this matter most expeditiously and issue orders in the light
of what is stated above and in accordance with law. To enable
this process, the parties are directed to appear before the court
below at the next date of hearing. This writ petition is ordered
accordingly.
(THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE)
aks