REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

MAYER SIMON Appellant

V/S

ADVOCATE GENERAL, KERALA Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

SHARP V. WAKEFIELD [REFERRED TO]
INLAND REVENUE COMMISSIONERS V. SNEATH [REFERRED TO]
SCHMIDT V. SECRETARY OF STATE FOR HOME AFFAIRS [REFERRED TO]
RIDGE V. BALDWIN [REFERRED TO]
WISEMAN AND OTHERS V. BORNEMAN AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
REX V. INCOME-TAX SPECIAL COMMISSIONERS,EX PARTE ELMHIRST [REFERRED TO]
BREEN V. AMALGAMATED ENGINEERING UNION [REFERRED TO]
R. V. METROPOLITAN POLICE COMMISSIONER [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MADRAS VS. C P SARATHY [REFERRED TO]
CALCUTTA GAS COMPANY PROPRIETARY LIMITED VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [REFERRED TO]
CHAIRMAN MADAPPA VS. M N MAHANTHADEVARU ANA [REFERRED TO]
GADDE VENKATESWARA RAO VS. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ORISSA VS. BINAPAIRI DEI [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. ANGLO AF GHAN AGENCIES CIVIL APPEALS NOS 973 TO 975 OF 1967 THE UNION OF INDIA IN ALL THE APPEALS APPELLANT V OM PRAKASH [REFERRED TO]
A K KRAIPAK VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
SAHODARA DEVI VS. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. BAKHTAWAR SINGH [REFERRED TO]
A K BHASKAR VS. ADVOCATE GENERAL [OVERRULED]
HAJI K M ABDUL KASIM VS. P M N MOHAMMED DAWOOD [REFERRED TO]
ARYAN KOCHUNNI NAYAR VS. DISTRICT COLLECTOR ALLEPPEY [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question is whether the order Ext. P3 passed by the Advocate General of Kerala, the first respondent, refusing "consent in writing" as envisaged by S.92(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure to the petitioner for instituting a suit along with another for the reliefs that would fall under that sub-section is amenable to be quashed, as prayed for, by the issue of a writ of certiorari. The order Ext. P3 is a brief one and reads thus:

(2.) The circumstances which led to the application before the Advocate General are stated in the order of reference of Isaac J., the relevant p of which we shall extract:

(3.) Isaac J. felt that the Full Bench (consisting of 3 Judges) decision of this Court in A. K. Bhaskar v. Advocate General AIR 1962 Kerala 90 required reconsideration and the case was therefore placed before the Chief Justice who directed the posting of the case before a Division Bench. The Division Bench, consisting of Govindan Nair and Sadasivan JJ. before whom the case came up, referred the case to a Full Bench for decision and the Full Bench consisting of Raghavan C. J. and Balakrishna Eradi and Namboodiripad JJ. felt that the case has to be placed before a "Fuller Bench".

Click here to view full judgment.

MAYER SIMON Vs. ADVOCATE GENERAL KERALA

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address