Court emphasizes strict adherence to procedural rules under Kerala High Court Rules, 1971; Petitioner granted liberty to file anew.
In a significant ruling, the Kerala High Court, presided over by Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan, has disposed of a writ petition due to improper marking of exhibits, underscoring the necessity for strict compliance with procedural rules under the Kerala High Court Rules, 1971. The case, titled "Nowfal v. Secretary, Angadippuram Grama Panchayat Po Angadippuram," revolved around allegations of illegal construction on a paddy wetland.
The petitioner, Nowfal, sought multiple writs of mandamus to halt construction activities and revoke building permits granted to Respondents 9 & 10 for a structure on paddy land in Angadippuram Village. He argued that these constructions violated the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008, and posed a threat to local ecological health.
However, Justice Kunhikrishnan noted procedural deficiencies in the petition, specifically the improper marking of exhibits and documents. The judgment emphasized that proper description and marking of documents are mandatory in pleadings as per the Kerala High Court Rules, 1971. The exhibits in the petition were not marked as required, leading to procedural errors that the court found unacceptable. The registry's failure to notice these defects when numbering the writ petition was also noted as surprising.
Justice Kunhikrishnan referenced previous judgments to reinforce the importance of proper documentation. The court highlighted that affidavits supporting writ petitions must contain clear statements proving the facts and documents tendered, as dictated by Rule 154 of the Kerala High Court Rules, 1971. The improper marking of exhibits could undermine the credibility and clarity of the petition, which is crucial for judicial proceedings.
The court granted the petitioner liberty to file a fresh writ petition with correct pleadings and proper marking of exhibits, allowing him to pursue his claims in accordance with procedural rules. This decision serves as a reminder of the importance of adherence to procedural norms in legal filings, ensuring that judicial processes are conducted efficiently and transparently.
Bottom Line:
Proper marking and description of documents in pleadings are mandatory for compliance with procedural rules under the Kerala High Court Rules, 1971. A writ petition with incorrectly marked exhibits cannot be entertained without appropriate correction.
Statutory provision(s): Kerala High Court Rules, 1971, Rule 154, Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008
