High Court Kerala High Court

Vinu Koshy Abraham vs The Secretary on 22 February, 2008

Kerala High Court
Vinu Koshy Abraham vs The Secretary on 22 February, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 6358 of 2008(F)


1. VINU KOSHY ABRAHAM, 10 B4,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. ABM BUILDERS PVT, LTD.,

                        Vs



1. THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF COCHIN,
                       ...       Respondent

2. ABM TOWERS RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION,

3. TRIBUNAL FOR LOCAL SELF GOVT.,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.E.R.VENKATESWARAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE

 Dated :22/02/2008

 O R D E R
                             PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, J.

                             -------------------------

                          W.P.(C) No. 6358 of 2008

                        ---------------------------------

              Dated, this the 22nd day of February, 2008


                                  J U D G M E N T

In the nature of the relief which is being given to the petitioner,

I am not inclined to issue notice to the respondents. The appeal,

Ext.P2, preferred against Ext.P1 order of the Secretary was dismissed

by the Tribunal for default. Shri.E.R.Venkiteswaran, learned counsel

for the petitioner submits that the circumstances, under which the

appeal came to be dismissed for default, have been truly and

correctly disclosed in the writ petition as well as in the affidavit which

has been filed in support of Ext.P3 application for restoration

subsequently filed. I am told that the Tribunal is yet to register

Ext.P3. I do not find any reason to doubt the correctness of the

averments in the affidavit sworn to by the learned advocate himself

in support of Ext.P3 application. I dispose of the writ petition

directing the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions to

register Ext.P3 at the earliest and dispose of the same in accordance

with law as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of

one month of registering Ext.P3. Since I am informed that till Ext.P2

appeal was dismissed for default, Ext.P1 was under stay, I order that

Ext.P1 will continue to be stayed till the application, Ext.P3, is disposed of.

This writ petition is disposed of as above.

(PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE)

jg