Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
HARISANKAR V. MENON, J
M/S. AUTOFIT CAR INTERIORS – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. arguments about implementing court directives. (Para 2 , 5) |
| 2. entitlement to refunds based on court directions. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's view on obligation to comply without explicit direction. (Para 6) |
O R D E R
Read the order dated 15.01.2026.
2. Heard Sri.Arjun S., the learned counsel for the review petitioner, as well as Sri.Suvin R.Menon, the learned Senior Panel Counsel for the respondents.
3. The complaint in this review petition is essentially with reference to the refusal on the part of the respondents in granting consequential reliefs in view of the declaration granted by this Court while passing the judgment sought to be reviewed.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the review petitioner that, even in the light of the declaration granted in the operative portion of the judgment, the respondents are refusing to extend the consequential reliefs while implementing the directions. According to him, if the directions are implemented, the review petitioner would be entitled for refund of various amounts, as highlighted in Annexure-1 dated 21.01.2025 submitted before the 3rd respondent herein.
5. Per contra, the learned Senior Panel Counsel on behalf
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
