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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 56619

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. NATARAJAN, J
MARIYAMMA NINAN – Appellant
Versus
VINOD KUMAR T.K. – Respondent
CRP NO. 29 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.P.MOHANDAS, SRI.SABU PULLAN, DR.K.P.SATHEESAN (SR.)
For the Respondents: A.V. GOPINATHA NAIR

Permission to withdraw a civil revision petition is at the discretion of the court, confirming procedural authority.

Headnote:Statute Analysis: The court evaluates the procedural aspects of withdrawal of revision petitions under applicable provisions. Facts of the Case: The petitioners brought a revision petition against the order dated 29.11.2024; however, they sought to withdraw it during the hearing.

Findings of Court:
The court granted permission for withdrawal.

Issues: The primary issue framed was whether permission could be granted for withdrawal.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reaffirmed that consent for withdrawal is within the discretion of the court.

Result: The revision petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

O R D E R The learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the revision petition.

2. Permission granted.

Accordingly, the revision petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

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 Back to top