Abdul Hameed vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 15983 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
     MONDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 11TH SRAVANA, 1943
                     WP(C) NO. 13039 OF 2021


PETITIONER/S:


    1     ABDUL HAMEED, AGED 68 YEARS
          THAYYIL VADAKKETHIL HOUSE, KEERIKKADU VILLAGE,
          KANNAMPILLY BHAGAM AND MURI, KAYAMKULAM P.O.,
          KARTHIKAPALLY TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN 690 502

    2     AMINA BEEVI
          AGED 62 YEARS, W/O.ABDUL HAMEED, THAYYIL VADAKKETHIL
          HOUSE, KEERIKKADU VILLAGE, KANNAMPILLY BHAGAM AND
          MURI, KAYAMKULAM P.O., KARTHIKAPALLY TALUK, ALAPPUZHA
          DISTRICT, PIN 690 502




          BY ADV VARGHESE C.KURIAKOSE


RESPONDENT/S:
    1    STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT,
         TRIVANDRUM-I.

    2     THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
          (CONSTITUTED UNDER THE MAINTENANCE AND WELFARE OF
          PARENTS AND SENIOR CITIZENS ACT)
          (THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR/DISTRICT MAGISTRATE),
          ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, CIVIL STATION, ALAPPUZHA 688 001

    3     THE MAINTENANCE TRIBUNAL,
          (CONSTITUTED UNDER THE MAINTENANCE AND
          WELFARE OF PARENTS AND SENIOR CITIZENS ACT),
          THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER AND
          SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
          SH-10, MAVELIKKARA-KOZHENCHERY ROAD,
          CHENGANNUR 689 121

    4     RIYAS, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL HAMEED,
          KOCHUTHEKKETHIL HOUSE, KANNAMPILLY BHAGAM AND MURI,
          KEERIKKADU VILLAGE, KAYAMKULAM P.O., ALAPPUZHA
          DISTRICT 690 502
 WP(C) NO. 13039 OF 2021
                                       2




   5       HASEENA BHAI, W/O.RIYAS, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
           KOCHUTHEKKETHIL HOUSE, KANNAMPILLY BHAGAM AND
           MURI, KEERIKKADU VILLAGE, KAYAMKULAM P.O.,
           ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT 690 502

           BY ADVS.
           V.G.ARUN (K/795/2004)
           V.JAYA RAGI
           R.HARIKRISHNAN (KAMBISSERIL)
           NEERAJ NARAYAN
           N.RAPHY RAJ

           SR.GP V.K SUNIL




    THIS    WRIT    PETITION     (CIVIL)   HAVING   COME   UP    FOR
ADMISSION    ON    02.08.2021,   THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 13039 OF 2021
                                   3



                         JUDGMENT

The petitioners are the senior citizens, who are the

parents of the third respondent. Fourth respondent is the

wife of the third respondent. It seems that disputes arose

between the petitioners and the respondents 3 and 4, which

resulted in filing of application under Section 23 of the

Maintenance of Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act

and Rules. This resulted in Ext.P5 order, which is under

challenge in Ext.P6. Though, several contentions were set

up by both sides, at present, having regard to the nature of

exercise of jurisdiction involved, I am not inclined to go into

the disputed question of facts. Suffice to hold that interest

of justice will be served, if the appellate tribunal, which is

the second respondent is directed to take up Ext.P6 appeal

and to dispose it of, as expeditiously as possible, at any

rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt

of a copy of this judgment, after giving a reasonable

opportinuity of being heard to both sides. Since it was

submitted that the contesting respondents 4 and 5 have not WP(C) NO. 13039 OF 2021

received notice in the appeal, I am inclined to direct that the

petitioners and respondents 4 and 5 shall appear before the

appellate authority on 12.08.2021 at 11 AM, on which day,

the office of the 6th respondent shall permit them to mark

their appearance. The parties may be given a reasonable

opportunity of being heard and the proceedings can continue

before the appellate authority thereafter. However, if for

any reason the appellate authority is not sitting on that day

or cannot take up the matter on that day due to other

administrative exigencies, the matter shall be adjourned to

another near day with notice to both sides and they shall

participate and continue to participate in all future

proceedings.

Writ Pertition is disposed of.

Sd/-

SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE R.AV WP(C) NO. 13039 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13039/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED NO.711/2015 OF SRO, KARIYILAKULANGARA DATED 25.5.2015

Exhibit P2 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE TAX PAID RECEIPT IN RESPECT OF THE PROPERTY

Exhibit P3 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE RATION CARD ISSUED BY THE RATIONING AUTHORITY

Exhibit P4 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.7075/2021 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

Exhibit P5 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14.5.2021 DELIVERED ON 8.6.2021

Exhibit P6 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE APPEAL BY INVOKING SECTION 16 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS NIL