Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 15125
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
SATHISH NINAN, P. KRISHNA KUMAR, JJ
M/S.PRIYA RUBBER ESTATE AND PLANTATIONS PVT.LTD. – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 32234 OF 2018
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.JOY GEORGE, SMT.PRAICY JOSEPH, SHRI.VINO JOSE, SMT.TANYA JOY
For the Respondents: None listed
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.JOY GEORGE, SMT.PRAICY JOSEPH, SHRI.VINO JOSE, SMT.TANYA JOY
For the Respondents: None listed
The dismissal of the writ petition reaffirms the authority of the Tribunal in property possession cases and clarifies the appellate process in such matters.
Headnote:The petition seeks restoration of property possession following a Tribunal judgment. The prior judgment in MFA(Forest) No.133/2018 has set aside the Tribunal's ruling. The court found no prejudice to the petitioner's rights and dismissed the writ petition. The key issue was the authority of the Tribunal and the standing of the appellant to petition for restoration. The final outcome was the dismissal of the writ petition.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition for property restoration post-tribunal judgment. (Para 1) |
| 2. court's authority to dismiss writs without prejudice. (Para 2) |
J U D G M E N T
Sathish Ninan, J.
The writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondent State to restore possession of property to the applicants pursuant to the judgment of the Tribunal dated
20.03.2018 in OA 1/2010.
2. As per the judgment in MFA(Forest) No.133/2018 of even date the judgment in the OA stands set aside and the matter has been remanded back to the Tribunal. In the light thereof, without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner, the writ petition will stand dismissed.
Sd/-
