IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MRS.MANJULA CHELLUR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 9TH DECEMBER 2011 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WA.No. 1835 of 2011(K) ---------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.24945/2009 .................... APPELLANT(S): --------------------- ANURUP.K., MANAGING PARTNER, M/S.V.A.TREADS, BARASS COMPLEX, PIRIVUSALA, CHANDRANAGAR P.O., PALAKKAD-678 007. BY ADV. SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON SRI.JIBU P THOMAS SRI.P.S.APPU SRI.A.R.NIMOD RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. DISTRICT INDUSTRIES PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANGER. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.JAMES MATHEW KADAVAN THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MANJULA CHELLUR, Ag.C.J & P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ---------------------------------------------- W.A.No. 1835 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of December, 2011 JUDGMENT Ramachandra Menon, J. The grievance projected in this appeal is with regard to the rejection of I.A.No.14234 of 2011 filed by the appellant/petitioner for enlargement of time granted by the learned Single Judge to complete the industrial project and to commence production. 2. The case of the appellant as narrated in the proceedings shows that the appellant was allotted a plot in an industrial area, subject to certain conditions. In spite of the allotment of the plot years back, construction was not completed and the commitment under the terms of allotment was not satisfied, under which circumstances, steps were taken by the concerned respondents to have the property retrieved, which made the appellant to approach this Court by filing W.P(C).No.24945 of 2009. After hearing both sides, the Writ Petition was disposed of by the learned Single Judge as per judgment dated 8.6.2010, granting three months' time to complete the construction and to have the WA.1835/11 2 coercive proceedings withheld till such time, giving appropriate direction to the concerned respondents. It is admitted that the appellant could not complete the construction or start production within the time allotted, which made him to approach this Court again by filing I.A.No. 14234 of 2011 seeking for further time of three months. The said application came up for consideration before the learned Single Judge on 6.9.2011, when it was observed that the verdict was passed as early as on 8.6.2010, granting three months' time to complete the industrial project and to commence production and that the time had already run out to an extent of nearly one year in place of three months. It was in such circumstances, that the I.A was dismissed, which in turn is under challenge in this appeal. 3. The prayer in the I.A was to enlarge the time granted in the judgment dated 8.6.2010 in W.P(C).No.24945 of 2009 by a further period of three months, to complete the industrial project and commence production. Obviously, the said application is dated 22nd August, 2011. Today, it is the 9th December, 2011. The prayer has become infructuous, as the period sought for is already over. WA.1835/11 3 In the above circumstances, we find no ground to interfere with the verdict passed by the learned Single Judge. The Writ Appeal fails and the same is dismissed accordingly. MANJULA CHELLUR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE vgs