Kerala High Court
P.T.Thomas vs State Of Kerala on 23 August, 2007
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH
TUESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF JUNE 2012/5TH ASHADHA 1934
OP(C).No. 1974 of 2012 (O)
--------------------------
OS.306/2007 of PRL.SUB COURT,KOTTAYAM
PETITIONER(S):
-------------
P.T.THOMAS, AGED 67 YEARS
S/O. THOMAS
PURAYIDATHIL HOUSE PADINJATTUNBHAGAM KARA
ATHIRAMPUZHA.P.O., KOTTAYAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.T.KRISHNAN UNNI (SR.)
SRI.RAJEEV.P.NAIR
SRI.GOPAKUMAR G. (ALUVA)
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER
P.W.D. ROAD AND BRIDGES, P.W.D. OFFICE
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN-695001.
3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER
P.W.D. ROAD AND BRIDGES, P.W.D. OFFICE
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN-695001.
4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
P.W.D. ROAD AND BRIDGES, P.W.D. OFFICE
KOTTAYAM-686001.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SAREENA GEORGE
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26-06-2012, THE COURT
ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP(C) NO. 1974/2012
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS
EXT.P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT FILED IN O.S. NO. 306/2007 ON THE FILE OF
THE PRINCIPAL SUB COURT KOTTAYAM DATED 23-8-2007.
EXT.P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED IN O.S. NO. 306/2007
ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, KOTTAYAM DATED 13-6-
2008.
EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED 11-8-2009 PASSED BY
THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN R.F.A. NOS. 871/2008, 873/2008,. 877/2008
AND 896/2008.
EXT.P4 A TRUE COPY OF COMMON JUDGMENT DATED 29-3-2006 IN O.S. NOS.
289/2000, 293/2000, 295/2000, 301/2000, 309/2000, 307/2000 311/2000,
313/2000, 327/2000 329/2000 AND 331/2000 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL SUB
COURT, KOTTAYAM.
EXT.P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL FILED BY THE
RESPONDENTS IN R.F.A NNO. 490/2007 BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OF
KERALA.
EXT.P6 A TRUE COPY OF COMMON JUDGMENT DATED 22-12-2011 IN O.S. NOS.
116/2007, 95/2008, 164/2008, 422/2008, 424/2008, 307/2000 AND 636/2008
PASSED BY THE ADDL. SUB COURT, KOTTAYAM.
EXT.P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 29-5-2012 FILED
BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA, AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE IN O.S. NO. 116/2007 OF THE ADDL. SUB
COURT, KOTTAYAM.
EXT.P8 A TRUE OPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 2-6-2012 FILED BY THE
PETITIONER AS I.A. NO. 1992/2012 IN O.S. NO. 306/2007 BEFORE THE
PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, KOTTAYAM.
EXT.P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 7-6-2012 PASSED BY THE
PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, KOTTAYAM IN I.A. NO.1991/2012 IN O.S. NO.
304/2007 I.A. NO. 1992/2012 IN O.S. NO. 306/2007 I.A. NO. 1993/2012 IN O.S.
NO. 163/2008 I.A. NO. 1994/2012 IN O.S. NO. 165/2008 I.A. NO. 1995/2012 IN
O.S. NO. 423/2008 I.A. NO. 1996/2012 IN O.S. NO. 425/2008 AND I.A. NO.
1997/2012 IN O.S. NO. 429/2008.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.A. TO JUDGE.
V. CHITAMBARESH, J
--------------------------------
OP(C) NO. 1974 OF 2012
------------------------------------
Dated this the 26th day of June, 2012
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is the plaintiff in suits claiming interest for belated settlement of bills by the government. The suits numbered as O.S. Nos. 304/2007, 306/2007, 163/2008, 165/2008, 423/2008, 425/2008 and 429/2008 are pending on the file of the court of Principal Subordinate Judge of Kottayam. The petitioner sought for a stay of all these seven suits pending disposal of RFA Nos. 490/2007, 509/2007 and six other indigent appeals pending on the file of this court. The court below has rejected the application put in by the petitioner under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure by Ext.P9 order which is impugned in this Original Petition.
2. The following factors are relevant:
(i) The subject matter of the contracts involved in these six suits are different.
(ii) The reasons for belated settlement of bills by the government are also different. 2 OP(C) No. 1974/2012
(iii) The matter in issue is not directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit.
The mere fact that one common question relating to the applicability of clause 69 of Madras Detailed Standard Specifications (MDSS) arises is wholly insufficient to stay the suits either under Section 10 or under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
3. It is for the court below to consider the applicability of the decision in P.J. Mathai Vs. State of Kerala [ILR 1981 Ker. 582] while trying the suits pending before it. I do not find any infirmity in the order impugned warranting interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
The Original Petition fails and is dismissed.
V. CHITAMBARESH JUDGE ncd