SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1990 Supreme(Ker) 315

SREEDHARAN
Mathew Joseph – Appellant
Versus
Arakulam Panchayat – Respondent


Judgment :-

When C.M.P. No. 12041/1990 came up for orders learned counsel appearing on either side wanted the Original Petition itself heard and disposed of. Accordingly, I heard them in detail. I am disposing of the Original Petition.

2. Government by Ext.P4 order, G.O.(MS) No. 32/90 dated 25-6-1990 extended the provisions of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' to the Arakulam Panchayat area in Idukki District with effect from the date of publication of the notification. Petitioner challenges the notification on the ground that Resolution No.13 stated to have been passed by the Arakulam Panchayat requesting for the extension of the provisions of the Act to the area covered by the Panchayat was not one validly passed. Reliance has been made to Rules 4 (1) and 5 of the Kerala Panchayats (Proceedings of Panchayat Meetings and Committees) Rules, 1962, hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'. As per Rule 4(1) no meeting shall be held unless notice of the day and time when the meeting is to be held and the business to be transacted there-atlas been given at least 3 clear days before the date of the meeting. It means that the busines









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top