Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 1612

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. BABU, J
DR DEEPAK NAIR M.V. – Appellant
Versus
SASIREKHA – Respondent
RPFC NO. 150 OF 2023

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.JOHNSON ABRAHAM, SHRI.NELSON ABRAHAM, SHRI.EMIL JOHNSON
For the Respondents: SMT.VALSAMMA KURIAN JOSE

Withdrawal of revision petitions can be permitted and results in dismissal without further findings.

Headnote:The court addressed the permission sought by the revision petitioner to withdraw the Revision Petition. The court noted the request and granted the permission to withdraw. Ultimately, the court dismissed the Revision Petition as withdrawn, reflecting no further proceedings or findings were presented by the court.

O R D E R

The learned counsel for the revision petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the Revision Petition.

2. The permission sought for is granted.

The Revision Petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

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 :

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 1612

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMK. BABU, JDR DEEPAK NAIR M.V. – AppellantVersusSASIREKHA – RespondentRPFC NO. 150 OF 2023

Withdrawal of revision petitions can be permitted and results in dismissal without further findings.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. BABU, J
DR DEEPAK NAIR M.V. – Appellant
Versus
SASIREKHA – Respondent
RPFC NO. 150 OF 2023