Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. NATARAJAN, J
SENTHIL KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
SURESH KUMAR – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court addresses maintainability and appealability. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioner seeks withdrawal with liberty to appeal. (Para 3) |
JUDGMENT
(Dated this the 7th day of January, 2026)
1. The Office raised objection regarding maintainability of the OP (C) under Article 227 of the Constitution of India , as the order under challenge is appealable under Order XLIII Rule
1 (a) of the Code of Civil Procedure .
2. Perused the order under challenge which is return of plaint, passed under Order VII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure , which is appealable.
3. At this Stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeking permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to file an appeal.
4. Submission placed on record.
Accordingly, the Original Petition is dismissed as withdrawn and liberty granted as prayed for. The petitioner is entitled for exemption for the time spent in this petition.
Sd/-
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
