G. Thankamma Amma vs. N. Raghava Kurup
AI Summary
The Supreme Court dismissed a Special Leave Petition challenging a Kerala High Court order, thereby upholding the earlier judgment. This decision means the legal battle, initiated decades ago, has concluded at the apex court level, impacting the parties involved in what appears to be a long-standing property or civil dispute.
Case Identifiers
Petitioner's Counsel
Advocates on Record
eCourtsIndia AITM
Brief Facts Summary
A Special Leave Petition (Diary No. 22333/2019) was filed in the Supreme Court by G. Thankamma Amma & Ors., challenging a final judgment and order dated November 8, 2018, passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in Second Appeal No. 451/1994. The petition included applications for condonation of delay in filing and refiling/curing defects. The Supreme Court heard the matter on February 24, 2020, condoned the delay, but ultimately dismissed the Special Leave Petition, declining to interfere with the High Court's order.
Timeline of Events
Second Appeal (SA No. 451/1994) originated in the High Court of Kerala.
Final judgment and order passed by the High Court of Kerala in SA No. 451/1994.
Special Leave Petition (Diary No. 22333/2019) filed in the Supreme Court.
Applications for condonation of delay in filing and refiling filed.
Supreme Court hears the SLP, condones the delay, and dismisses the petition.
Key Factual Findings
There was a delay in filing the Special Leave Petition, which the Court deemed appropriate to condone.
Source: Current Court Finding
The High Court's impugned order, upon review, does not present sufficient grounds for interference by the Supreme Court.
Source: Current Court Finding
Primary Legal Issues
Secondary Legal Issues
Statutes Applied
Petitioner's Arguments
The petitioners implicitly argued that there were sufficient grounds to condone the delay in filing their Special Leave Petition and that the High Court's impugned order suffered from legal infirmities or injustice that warranted intervention by the Supreme Court.
Respondent's Arguments
The respondents implicitly argued against the condonation of delay and that the High Court's impugned order was legally sound and did not require any interference from the Supreme Court.
Court's Reasoning
The Court first condoned the delay in filing and refiling the Special Leave Petition, indicating that the petitioners provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay. However, after considering the merits of the case, the Court found no compelling reason or legal infirmity to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution. Therefore, the Court declined to interfere with the High Court's judgment and dismissed the Special Leave Petition, upholding the lower court's decision.
- Judicial Restraint
- Emphasis on Procedural Compliance
Impugned Orders
Specific Directions
- 1.Delay condoned.
- 2.We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order.
- 3.The Special Leave Petition is accordingly dismissed.
- 4.Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
Precedential Assessment
Non-Binding (Procedural)
This is a brief summary dismissal of a Special Leave Petition in limine, without a detailed exposition of law. While it confirms the High Court's decision in this specific case, it does not lay down a new or significant principle of law and thus holds limited precedential value beyond reiterating the discretionary nature of Article 136 jurisdiction.
Tips for Legal Practice
Legal Tags
Disclaimer: eCourtsIndia (ECI) is not a lawyer and this analysis is generated by ECI AI, it might make mistakes. This is not a legal advice. Please consult with a qualified legal professional for matters requiring legal expertise.
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
Case Registered
Listed On:
24 Feb 2020
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
ITEM NO.6 COURT NO.15 SECTION XI-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 22333/2019
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 08-11-2018 in SA No. 451/1994 passed by the High Court Of Kerala At Ernakulam)
G. THANKAMMA AMMA & ORS. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
N. RAGHAVA KURUP & ORS. Respondent(s)
(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.29937/2020-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No.29938/2020-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING / CURING THE DEFECTS )
Date : 24-02-2020 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA BOSE
For Petitioner(s)
Mr. Sanand Ramakrishnan, AOR
Mr. Rajeev Mishra,Adv.
Mr. Sanjeev Kr. Mahra,Adv.
For Respondent(s)
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
Delay condoned.
We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. The Special Leave Petition is accordingly dismissed.
Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
Digitally signed by AR CUM PS BRANCH OFFICER GEETA AHUJA Date: 2020.02.24 16:46:11 IST Reason: Signature Not Verified
(SUMAN WADHWA) (PRADEEP KUMAR)