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

2009 Supreme(Online)(KER) 2267

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J
G.ANIL KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS – Respondent


Advocates:
SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE

JUDGMENT

The main grievance of the petitioner is that, though he is having the requisite licence for bringing river sand from Tamil Nadu, his vehicles are being arbitrarily detained by the respondents causing much loss and hardship to him. The learned counsel for the petitioner, placing reliance on Ext. P7 order passed by the Supreme Court submits that the petitioner is pursuing his trade strictly in accordance with law which cannot be intercepted by the respondents, unless otherwise than under due process of law.

2. It is noted that when the petitioner had earlier approached this court by filing W.P.(C) 26269/08 (with slight modification in the prayer) the same was declined by Ext. P4 stating that the relief prayed for was not in respect of any specific instance and hence could not be granted; which in turn was confirmed by a Division Bench vide Ext.P5. However, similar verdict passed by the Division Bench in similar circumstances as borne by Ext. P6 was set aside by the Apex Court vide Ext. P7 , the last paragraph of which is extracted hereunder:

“The observations made by the learned Single Judge makes it clear that the approach of the High Court in this particular matter is erro

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