IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 29TH OCTOBER 2010 / 7TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 20233 of 2006(H) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SRI.RAMANATHAN, S/O.KUNJITHI, AGED 67 YEARS, PULLICKAL HOUSE, P.O. THOTTIPAL, THRISSUR – DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.M.H.HANIL KUMAR, SRI.A.P.VASAVAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. VILLAGE OFFICER, THOTTIPPAL VILLAGE, THOTTIPPAL P.O., THRISSUR DIST. 3. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DIST. 4. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM DIST. 5. M/S.U'RON MARKETING SERVICES PVT.LTD., T.C.25-806-1, MARVE ARCADE, THRISSUR. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K.P. PRADEEP. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/10/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.20233/2006-H: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE PARTITION DEED DTD. 04/06/83. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE APPEAL DT. 21/07/06. EXT.P.2.A: COPY OF THE STAY PETITION. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE R.R. NOTICE DT. 11/07/06. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT. 28/07/06. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBIT: EXT.R3.A: COPY OF THE LETTER NO. RR8.312/6 DTD. 28/06/06 ADDRESSED TO THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.20233 OF 2006 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of October, 2010 JUDGMENT This writ petition was admitted by this Court also granting an interim order as prayed for on 01-08-2006. But obviously, no 'main relief' is sought for in the writ petition, but for the interim relief shown at page 6 (immediately after the Grounds 1 to 5). Interim relief can only subserve the main relief. Quite strangely, a detailed counter affidavit has also been filed from the part of the respondent, stating that the petitioner is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for in the Writ Petition (para 10). In the absence of any main relief, this Court is not supported to look into the matter any further. The writ petition is dismissed accordingly; however without expressing anything on merits. The Registry will explain why no defect was noted in respect of the serious lapse. P.R.RAMACHANDRAMENON,JUDGE pm