Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

V.Surendran vs The Managing Director on 4 December, 2015

Author: Dama Seshadri Naidu

Bench: Dama Seshadri Naidu

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALAATERNAKULAM

                                              PRESENT:

               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU

        FRIDAY,THE 4TH DAYOF DECEMBER 2015/13TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937

                                  WP(C).No. 18193 of 2011 (Y)
                                   --------------------------------------

PETITIONER :-
----------------------

           V.SURENDRAN, AGED 56 YEARS,
           S/O.VELU, SREEBHAVAN, PANAVALLI P.O.,
           CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA, FARM WORKER IN
           MATSYAFEDDISTRICT OFFICE, ERNAKULAM.

           BY ADVS.SRI.A.X.VARGHESE
                         SRI.A.V.JOJO

RESPONDENTS : -
--------------------------

       1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
           MATSYAFED,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003.

       2. THE GENERAL MANAGER,
           KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE FEDERATION FOR FISHERIES
           DEVELOPMENT LTD., (MATSYAFED) KAMALESWARAM,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 009.

       3. THE DISTRICT MANAGER,
           MATSYAFEDDISTRICT OFFICE,
           ERNAKULAM - 682 030.

           R1-3 BY ADV. SRI.P.K.VIJAYAMOHANAN, SC, MATSYAFED
                   BY ADV.SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM, SC,MATSYAFED

           THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
          04-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAYDELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:




DMR/-



               DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.
             ---------------------------------------
               W.P.(c) No. 18193 of 2011
            ----------------------------------------
           Dated this the 04th day of December, 2015

                          JUDGMENT

On the last occasion, on 27.11.2015, none appeared for the petitioner; the matter stood posted to 04.12.2015 under the caption of disposal. Today as well, there is no representation for the petitioner. It is evident that the petitioner does not seeks to prosecute the case.

In the facts and circumstances, the writ petition is dismissed for default.

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE DMR/-