Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 8617
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MR. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
ALL KERALA HOUSE BOAT OWNERS ASSOCIATION – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA DEPARTMENT OF PORT – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 25651 OF 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.DENIZEN KOMATH, SRI.RENJITH THAMPAN (SR.)
For the Respondents: GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SHRI.K.P.SUDHEER, SC, KERALA MARITIME BOARD, SHRI.B.PRAMOD, SHRI.N.MANOJ KUMAR, STATE ATTORNEY, SHRI.K.R.RANJITH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER WITH STATE ATTORNEY, SHRI.ATHUL M.V.
The court holds that a writ petition can be dismissed as infructuous when subsequent orders create fresh causes of action.
Headnote:The Court analyzed the nature of reliefs in WP
(C) No. 25651 of 2025, concluding that it has become infructuous due to subsequent orders potentially creating new causes of action. The parties conceded to the writ's infructuous nature and the Court dismissed it, stating no need for liberty. The petition was dismissed as infructuous.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition's infructuous status acknowledged. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
JUDGMENT
The learned counsel for the respondents submits that the writ petition has become infructuous.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, though the writ petition has become infructuous, considering the nature of reliefs sought for, there are subsequent orders which may give rise to a challenge or at least an amendment of the writ petition.
3. Since the subsequent orders can give rise to a fresh cause of action, no liberty is required to be reserved.
This writ petition has therefore become infructuous, as conceded by both parties, and hence it is dismissed as infructuous.
Sd/-
