IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
SUDHEESH KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
DR.S.N.RAVI – Respondent
JUDGMENT
The petitioner alleges that the first respondent who is medical Doctor is intending to open an alleged medical shop in his residence, pursuant to a tie up with the 2nd respondent. Pointing out the above, a complaint has been filed before the 4th respondent. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, despite the said complaint, the 4th respondent is not taking any action. Hence, he has approached this Court seeking a direction to consider his complaint which is produced as Ext.P4.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the respective Standing Counsel for respondents 3 and 4. Considering the nature of order that I propose to issue, this Court is of the view that notice to respondents 1 and 2 can be dispensed with.
Since the complaint filed by the petitioner as Ext.P4 was received by the 4th respondent, there will be a direction to the said respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the said complaint, as expeditiously as possible, in a time bound manner, at any rate, within an outer period of seven months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as to
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.