Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 1620

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
T.R.RAVI, J
ROY JOSEPH – Appellant
Versus
JOSE CHACKO – Respondent
OP(C) NO. 1016 OF 2025

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.T.THASMI, SHRI. DILEEP S. KRISHNAPRIYA G., SMT.ATHIRA A.MENON
For the Respondents: SRI.JOJU KYNADY, SHRI.RESHVAN A., SHRI.SAURAV SHAJI

A party may withdraw a petition at any stage, leading to its dismissal.

Headnote:The petitioners sought withdrawal of their original petition. The Court allowed their request, leading to dismissal of the petition as withdrawn. The counsel for the petitioners adequately represented their position, and the Court's order reflects this. Thus, the matter is formally concluded with a dismissal.

ORDER

The counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the original petition.

Permission granted and the original petition is dismissed as withdrawn.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) 1620

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMT.R.RAVI, JROY JOSEPH – AppellantVersusJOSE CHACKO – RespondentOP(C) NO. 1016 OF 2025

A party may withdraw a petition at any stage, leading to its dismissal.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
T.R.RAVI, J
ROY JOSEPH – Appellant
Versus
JOSE CHACKO – Respondent
OP(C) NO. 1016 OF 2025