Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
N.NAGARESH, J
A.M.M.H.S. SCHOOL EDAYARANMULA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT – Appellant
Versus
SEENA JOY – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. need for fairness in judicial process (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. importance of notice to parties (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. correction of procedural oversight (Para 5) |
ORDER
Dated this the 13th day of March, 2026 W.P.(C) No.43960/2025 was disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P7 Revision Petition and pass appropriate orders thereon within a period of three months.
2. The review petitioners submit that the judgment was delivered without notice to the review petitioners and any decision taken pursuant to Ext.P7 is likely to affect the review petitioners. Therefore, there is error apparent on the face of the judgment.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the review petitioners, the learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent and the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 2 to 6.
4. The Government Pleader submits that even though there was no direction to give notice to parties, the 1st respondent had issued notice to the review petitioners on 15.11.2025 requiring to appear for hearing on 11.12.2025.
The review petitioners did not appear.
5. Be that as it may, as any orders passed pursuant to the judgment is likely to affect the review petitioners, the revi
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
