Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 8918

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
VIJU ABRAHAM, J
M.K. KABEER – Appellant
Versus
THE MARADU MUNICIPALITY – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 19731 OF 2023

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.JOBY JACOB PULICKEKUDY, SRI.ANIL GEORGE, SHRI.DAJISH JOHN, SMT.SMITHA PHILIPOSE, SHRI.ASHIK TOM, SHRI.AAKHIL MOHAMMED.P.M
For the Respondents: SHRI.T.R.RAJAN SC, MARADU MUNICIPALITY

Court affirms dismissal of writ petition as not pressed based on petitioner's counsel's statement.

Headnote:This judgment concerns WP

(C) NO. 19731 OF 2023. The court reviews the merits of the petitioner's claims regarding municipal permits and dismisses the petition as not pressed, thereby affirming the municipality's decisions without contest. The court identifies the core issue as the validity of the writ petition in light of counsel's statement and finds no substantive ground to proceed with the matter. Ultimately, the petition is dismissed as not pressed on the grounds presented during the hearing.

JUDGMENT

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter is not pressed.

Accordingly the writ petition is dismissed as not pressed.

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) 8918

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMVIJU ABRAHAM, JM.K. KABEER – AppellantVersusTHE MARADU MUNICIPALITY – RespondentWP(C) NO. 19731 OF 2023

Court affirms dismissal of writ petition as not pressed based on petitioner's counsel's statement.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
VIJU ABRAHAM, J
M.K. KABEER – Appellant
Versus
THE MARADU MUNICIPALITY – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 19731 OF 2023