Kerala High Court
Vaidyaraman @ Raghu vs Ramanathan.V.Krishnan on 8 December, 2014
Author: V.Chitambaresh
Bench: V.Chitambaresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH
MONDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2014/17TH AGRAHAYANA, 1936
OP(C).No. 1550 of 2014 (O)
----------------------------------
OS 1689/2011 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,THRISSUR
................................................
PETITIONERS:-
----------------------
1. VAIDYARAMAN @ RAGHU, AGED 59 YEARS
S/O.VADAKKUMMURI VADAKEMADATHIL V.L.KRISHNAYYAR
VELLARAKKAD VILLAGE & DESOM, THALAPPILLY TALUK
THRISSUR DISTRICT.
2. V.K.HARIHARAN, AGED 64 YEARS
S/O.KRISHNAYYAR, 109/Y RUMRA, WARA-14
AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR.
BY ADVS.SRI.M.P.RAMNATH
SRI.P.RAJESH (KOTTAKKAL)
SEI.M.VARGHESE VARGHESE
SMT.UMA R.KAMATH
SMT.S.SANDHYA
SRI.BEPIN PAUL
SRI.SHALU VARGHESE
RESPONDENT:
----------------------
RAMANATHAN.V.KRISHNAN,
S/O.VADAKKUMMURI, VADAKEMADATHIL V.L.KRISHNAYYAR
VELLARAKKAD VILLAGE & DESOM, THALAPPILLY TALUK
THRISSUR DISTRICT
PRESENTLY IN ERNAKULAM CORPORATION
39/16 OPP KRISHNA HOSPITAL, CHITTUR ROAD
COCHIN-682035.
BY ADVS. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR
SRI.P.GOPINATHA MENON
SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS
SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI
SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN
SRI.KURYAN THOMAS
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08-12-2014,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
DCS
OP(C).No. 1550 of 2014 (O)
------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-------------------------------------
EXT.P1 COPY OF THE I.A.10499/2011 IN O.S.1689/2011 OFTHE HON'BLE SUB
COURT,THRISSUR FILED BY THE PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT IN
THE OP
EXT.P2 COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE DEFENDANT/
PETITIONERS IN THIS OP IN IA 10499/2011 IN O.S.1689/2011 OF THE
HON'BLE SUB COURT,THRISSUR
EXT.P3 COPY OF THE INTERROGATORIES RAISED AS PER I.A.429/2013 IN
O.S.1689/2011 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SUB COURT THRISSUR-
PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT HEREWITH
EXT.P4 COPY OF THE COUNTER FILED BY THE
DEFENDANTS/PETITIONERS HEREIN TO EXT.P3 APPLICATION-
IA.429/2013 IN OS.1689/2011 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SUB
COURT,THRISSUR
EXT.P5 COPY OF THE IA.6565/2013 IN I.A.429/2013 IN O.S.1689/2011 BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SUB COURT,THRISSUR FILED BY PLAINTIFF
REQUIRING DIRECTION TO ISSUE DETAILED ANSWER
EXT.P6 COPY OF THE OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE
DEFENDANTS/PETITIONERS HEREIN TO EXT.P5 APPLICATION-
IA.6565/2013 IN I.A.429/2013 IN OS.1689/2011 BEFORE THE HON'BLE
SUB COURT,THRISSUR.
EXT.P7 COPY OF THE ORDER DT.25.11.2013IN I.A.6565/2013 IN I.A.429/2013
IN O.S.1689/2011
EXT.P8 COPY OF THE REVIEW PETITION FILED BY DEFENDANTS/
PETITIONERS HEREIN AS I.A.109469/2013 IN OS 1689/2011 BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SUB COURT,THRISSUR
EXT. P9 COPY OF COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY RESPONDENT IN I.A.
10469/2013 IN O.S. NO. 1689/2011 HON'BLE SUB COURT, THRISSUR
EXT.P10 COPY OF THE ORDER DT 24.02.2014 IN I.A.10469/2013 IN
O.S.1689/2011 DISMISSING EXT.P8 APPLICATION.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:-NIL
---------------------------------------
/TRUE COPY/
P.A. TO JUDGE
DCS
V.CHITAMBARESH,J.
-------------------------------
O.P.(C) No. 1550 of 2014
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 8th day of December, 2014
JUDGMENT
I am not prepared to hold that the answers furnished to the interrogatories served are wholly insufficient. The rest of the things are to be deduced from the evidence adduced by the parties in the suit. The suit is after all one for partition of the pre-existing rights of the parties.
2. There is no justification in directing the petitioners to answer further in regard to the interrogatories served as done by the court below. Ext. P7 order so passed as well as Ext. P10 order refusing to review Ext. P7 order are vitiated by an error of jurisdiction. Exts. P7 and P10 orders are set aside and the court below is directed to proceed with the suit on evidence. The court below is entitled to draw adverse inference if it finds on evidence that particulars in their custody are withheld by any of the parties.
The Original Petition is disposed of.
V.CHITAMBARESH JUDGE DCS