2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 667
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
T.R. RAVI, J
CELIN – Appellant
Versus
V.A. MARTIN – Respondent
OP(C) NO. 2022 OF 2025
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.P.B.SUBRAMANYAN, SMT.B.ANUSREE, SRI.MANU VYASAN PETER, SMT.AISWARYA MOHAN
For the Respondents: SHRI.NIDHI SAM JOHNS, SRI.A.KEVIN THOMAS, SRI.LIJO JOSEPH (THOPPIL), SMT.CELIA SANTHOSH
A petition may be dismissed as infructuous if the matter at hand no longer requires adjudication.
Headnote:The case pertains to OP
(C) No. 2022 of 2025 in which the counsel for the petitioners submitted that the matter has now become infructuous. Thus, the court determined that the original petition should be dismissed as infructuous per the request made during the hearing on 12th January 2026. The original petition is hence dismissed as infructuous.
Judgement Key Points
Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points:
- The case is from the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam, with the judgment delivered on 12th January 2026 (!) .
- The matter pertains to an Original Petition (OP(C) No. 2022 of 2025) involving the petitioner Celin and respondent V.A. Martin (!) .
- During the hearing, the counsel for the petitioners submitted that the matter had become infructuous, meaning it no longer required adjudication (!) .
- The court accepted this submission and dismissed the original petition as infructuous (!) .
- The court's decision was based on the principle that a petition may be dismissed as infructuous if the issues involved no longer require resolution (!) .
Please let me know if you need further analysis or assistance.
JUDGMENT
When the case is taken up, the counsel for the petitioners submitted that the matter has become infructuous.
The original petition is hence dismissed as infructuous.
Sd/-
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
