High Court of KeralaWP(C)/35327/2010dismissed for default

K.R.Vijaya v. The State Of Kerala

2015-12-10Honourable Mr. Justice Dama Seshadri Naidu2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU THURSDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/19TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 35327 of 2010 (M) --------------------------------------------- PETITIONER:

K.R. VIJAYA, W/O. KOCHUMON, PROPRIETRIX, HARITHA PHARMACEUTICALS, VARANDARAPPILLY, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

BY ADVS.SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR SMT.P.A.ANITHA RESPONDENTS:

1. THE STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF EXCISE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

2. THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

3. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

4. THE DEPUTY EXCISE COMMISSIONER, THRISSUR-680 001.

5. M/S. KOTTAKKAL ARYA VAIDYASALA REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KOTTAKKAL, MALAPPURAM - 676 503.

6. VAIDYARATNAM AYURVEDASALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, OLLUR, THAIKKATTUSSERY, THRISSUR - 680 303.

7. OUSHADI REPRESENTED BY MANAGING DIRECTOR, HEAD OFFICE, THRISSUR-680 003.

8. SITHARAM AYURVEDA PHARMACY LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, NEDUPUZHA, THRISSUR - 680 015.

9. NAGARJUNA PHARMACEUTICALS, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, THODUPUZHA-685 584.

10. COIMBATORE ARYA VAIDYA PHARMACY, REP. BY ITS MANAGER, ALWAYE, ERNAKULAM-683 101.

11. KERALA AYURVEDIC LIMITED REPRESENTED BY MANAGER, ALWAYE, ERNAKULAM-683 101.

R1-4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.G.GOPAKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Dama Seshadri Naidu, J.

------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.35327 of 2010 M -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of December, 2015

JUDGMENT

None appears for the petitioner. Despite the fact that the writ petition belongs to the year 2010 and that well in advance this Court has notified that the matter would be taken up today, the petitioner has not chosen to appear before the Court to prosecute the case. This Court accordingly holds that the petitioner may not be inclined to pursue the writ petition. As a result, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.

Dama Seshadri Naidu, Judge tkv