Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Laly Joseph @ Laly Sebastian vs K.U.Francis on 12 June, 2023

Author: P.Somarajan

Bench: P.Somarajan

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN
      MONDAY, THE 12th DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 22ND JYAISHTA, 1945
                      OP(C) NO. 1679 OF 2019
   AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 12.04.2019 IN I.A.No.1735/2016 IN OS
                 169/2013 OF MUNSIFF COURT, PALA
PETITIONER/PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF:

          LALY JOSEPH @ LALY SEBASTIAN, AGED 53 YEARS,
          W/o K.U JOSEPH, VALAPPARAMBIL HOUSE,
          NEYYAR KARA, PULIYANNOOR VILLAGE,
          MEENACHIL TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

          BY ADVS. LATHEESH SEBASTIAN
                   SRI.BABY THOMAS


RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT:

          K.U.FRANCIS, AGED 54 YEARS,
          S/o ULAHANNAN, VALAPPARAMBIL HOUSE,
          NEYYAR KARA, PULIYANNOOR VILLAGE,
          MEENACHIL TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 573.

          BY ADV SRI.MAHESH V RAMAKRISHNAN




     THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.06.2023,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 OP(C) No.1679 of 2019                  2




                                  JUDGMENT

The petitioner came up under Article 227 of the Constitution challenging Ext.P10 order, by which an application for issuance of a second commission, ie a Survey commission, was refused by the trial court. At first, a commission was appointed, who, in turn, visited the property and submitted report. Even, according to the plaintiff, her suit is one for injunction simplicitor. As such, there is no scope for issuing a survey commission at the instance of the plaintiff. The entire proceedings of the trial court have been stalled under the guise of present petition right from the year 2019 and as such the original petition will stand dismissed.

Sd/-

P.SOMARAJAN JUDGE DMR/-

OP(C) No.1679 of 2019 3

APPENDIX OF OP(C) 1679/2019 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S. NO. 169/2013 OF MUNSIFF COURT, PALA.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT AND COUNTER CLAIM OF THE RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT TO THE COUNTER CLAIM FILED BY THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF COMMISSIONER APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN OS. NO. 169/2013 OF MUNSIFF COURT, PALA.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF I.A. NO. 311/2015 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION OF THE PETITIONER TO EXT. P5 APPLICATION.

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER DATED 29.3.2016 EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF I.A. NO. 1735/2016 IN O.S. NO. 169/2013 EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION OF THE RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF MUNSIFF COURT, PALA IN I.A. NO. 1735/2016 IN O.S. NO. 169/2013 DATED 12.4.2019 // TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE