IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 21ST JANUARY 2011 / 1ST MAGHA 1932 WA.No. 100 of 2011() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.1159/2011 Dated 13/01/2011 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER : ------------------------------------ VISWANATHAN, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O LATE RAGHAVAN, VADAKKOTTIL HOUSE, BUDHANOOR, MEKKU, PERINGADU MURI,ENNAKADU VILLAGE BY ADV. MR. DINESH R.SHENOY MR. G.HARIKRISHNAN (TRIPUNITHURA) RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: --------------------------------------------- 1. VIJAYAN, AGED 66, S/O GOPALAKRISHNAN, MANDIRAM, PERINGADU MURI, BUDHANOOR MEKKU, ENNAKADU VILLAGE, PIN 689 510 2. SANTHAMMA, AGED 54, W/O VIJAYAN -DO- 3. SHIBU, AGED 32, S/O VIJAYAN, -DO- 4. MR. S.H, PANCHAPAKESAN, DISTRICT JUDGE, KOZHIKODE - 673 001 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J. CHELAMESWAR, C.J. & P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.A. No. 100 OF 2011 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 21st day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT J. Chelameswar, C.J. Aggrieved by judgment dated 30th January 2011 in W.P.(C) No. 1159 of 2011, the unsuccessful petitioner therein preferred this appeal. 2. Challenging the award dated 07.12.2008 of Taluk Legal Service Committee, Chengannur, which is marked as Ext. P11 in the Writ Petition, the writ petitioner, at whose instance the present appeal arises, filed the above mentioned Writ Petition with the prayers as follows : (a) A writ, order or direction setting aside Exhibit P11 award dated 07/12/2008, purported to have been passed in O.S. No. 146/2008, Sub Court, Chengannur. (b) A writ, order or direction restoring the suit, O.S. No. 146 / 2008, on the file of the Sub Court, Chengannur, to its filed for trial and disposal on merits. (c) An order granting such other reliefs as are deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The appellant made certain reckless allegations against the manner in which the award came to be passed. 4. By judgment under the appeal, a learned Single Judge of this Court dismissed the writ petition with exemplary cost, mainly on two W.A No. 100 of 2011 2 grounds: firstly, that there was a delay of about two years in approaching this Court, which, in the context, allegation made is an undue delay and secondly, that the allegations regarding the circumstances under which the award came to be made, are not supported by any appropriate material like the affidavit of Advocate, who appeared in the trial court etc. 5. We have gone through the judgment under appeal carefully. We are in agreement with the judgment under appeal in its entirety. The judgment does not warrant any interference. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed at the admission stage. J. CHELAMESWAR, CHIEF JUSTICE P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd