LATEST
WEBSTORY
TRENDING

SC to pronounce verdict tomorrow on petitions seeking 100% EVM-VVPAT verification

KKR vs PBKS IPL 2024 Dream11 prediction: Fantasy cricket tips for Kolkata Knight Riders vs Punjab Kings

Heeramandi first reviews out: Sanjay Leela Bhansali's OTT debut called 'mesmerising, must-watch masterpiece'

Skin care: Benefits of using aloe vera gel

Gold worth Rs 5 lakh is getting unearth daily here

Fruits with highest protein content

BJP appoints new state presidents in Telangana, Jharkhand, Punjab, Andhra ahead of 2024 Lok Sabha polls

Meet 'mystery girl' whose pictures with Indian cricketer Yuzvendar Chahal is going viral

SCO must not hesitate to criticise countries supporting terrorism: PM Modi

PHOTOS
VIDEOS
ENTERTAINMENT

Actors who died due to cosmetic surgeries

See inside pics: Malayalam star Aparna Das' dreamy wedding with Manjummel Boys actor Deepak Parambol

In pics: Salman Khan, Alia Bhatt, Rekha, Neetu Kapoor attend grand premiere of Sanjay Leela Bhansali's Heeramandi

Karnataka Horror: Congress Leader's Daughter Stabbed To Death On College Campus In Hubballi

Manipur: Firing At Polling Booth, Voters Run For Cover | Lok Sabha Elections 2024

Israel Launches Missile Attack on Iran's Isfahan In Response To Iranian Assault | Breaking News

Heeramandi first reviews out: Sanjay Leela Bhansali's OTT debut called 'mesmerising, must-watch masterpiece'

Harvey Weinstein's rape conviction in 2020 #MeToo case overturned by New York court

Laapataa Ladies OTT release: Here's when and where you can enjoy Kiran Rao's critically acclaimed film

Home India

India

13 proves unlucky yet again

Kerala HC slaps Rs 10,000 as cost on litigant who demanded court No 13.

Don Sebastian

Updated : Nov 19, 2013, 11:17 PM IST

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: Number 13 can be really unlucky for some, as a litigant in the High Court of Kerala realised on Monday.

N K Chandramohan from Kannur, who filed a Public Interest Litigation before the court pointing out that court number 13 was missing in the new court complex inaugurated this month in Kochi, found himself poorer by Rs 10,000.

Dismissing the PIL, a division Bench comprising Chief Justice VK Bali and Justice S Sirijagan gave the verdict saying the litigant did not have any right to safeguard or any grievance to redress.

Chandramohan had submitted that room number 13 was omitted because of the stigma of bad luck attached to the number. The superstition is Christian in origin, he said, urging the court to take into consideration Rahukala, inauspicious time, while hearing the cases in which Hindus are a party.

The court refuted the argument that number 13 is considered unlucky because there were 13 people at the Last Supper. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that 13 is an unlucky number, the court noted. The PIL lacked any authentic support, the Bench felt.

The court also rejected the second plea saying Hinduism does not insist on Rahukala for all occasions. Curiously enough, the first sitting on the new complex was on February 13. The litigant had conveniently omitted this fact, the court said. The new complex, adjacent to the old colonial building, does not have court No. 13. After court No. 12, it is 12-A.

The litigant has been asked to pay the cost with Kerala State Legal Services Authority. The court has warned of revenue recovery in case he fails to pay up.

Find your daily dose of news & explainers in your WhatsApp. Stay updated, Stay informed- Follow DNA on WhatsApp.

VIDEO OF THE DAY

Watch more

13 proves unlucky yet again

VIDEO OF THE DAY

Live tv

POPULAR STORIES

MOST VIEWED

MOST WATCHED

DNA ORIGNALS