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 0, Cited by 1]

Kerala High Court

Sivadasan Nair vs Registrar on 21 July, 2015

Author: A.Muhamed Mustaque

Bench: A.Muhamed Mustaque

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                              PRESENT:

           THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

      WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JANUARY 2017/14TH POUSHA, 1938

                     OP(C).No. 3330 of 2016 ()
                     --------------------------


AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OS 454/2011 of PRL.MUNSIFF COURT, CHERTHALA


PETITIONER(S)/REVIEW PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF.:
------------------------------------------

            SIVADASAN NAIR,
            S/O KRISHNAN NAIR, JYOTHI BHAVANAM,
            MARUTHORVATTOM,
            MURI OF THANNERMUKKAM NORTH VILLAGE.



            BY ADVS.SRI.T.JAYAKRISHNAN
                    SRI.R.KRISHNAKUMAR (CHERTHALA)

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS.:
--------------------------------------

          1. REGISTRAR,
            NAIR SERVICE SOCIETY, HEAD QUARTERS,
            CHANGANASSERY.

          2. CHERTHALA THALUK N.S.S KARAYOGAM,
            UNION NO.967, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
            CHERTHALA P.O. 688524.

          3. MARUTHORVATTOM SREE DHANVANTHARI
            VILASOM N.S.S KARAYOGAM,
            NO. 2486, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
            MARUTHORVATTOM P.O., CHERTHALA.688545.

          4. THE PRESIDENT,
            MARUTHORVATTOM SREE DHANVANTHARI
            VILASOM N.S.S. KARAYOGAM NO.2486,
            MARUTHORVATTOM P.O.,
            CHERTHALA. 688545.

          5. THE TREASURER,
            MARUTHORVATTOM SREE DHANVANTHARI VILASOM N.S.S
            KARAYOGAM NO. 2486, MARUTHORVATTOM P.O.,
            CHERTHALA. 688545.

       THIS OP (CIVIL)  HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION  ON
      04-01-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


EL

OP(C).No. 3330 of 2016 ()
--------------------------

                              APPENDIX

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------

EXHIBIT P1     A TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.NO.454/2011 OF
              ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF'S COURT CHERTHALA.

EXHIBIT P2     A TRUE COPY OF THE I.A.NO.2226/2014 FILED BY PLAINTIFF
              IN O.S NO. 454/2011 FOR DIRECTING 1ST DEFENDANT TO
              ANSWER INTERROGATORIES.

EXHIBIT P3     A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED IN I.A.NO.1449/2015
              DATED 21.7.2015.

EXHIBIT P4     A TRUE COPY OF MEMO FILED BY PLAINTIFF NOT PRESSING
              RELIEF OF PROHIBITORY INJUNCTION DATED 14.10.2015.

EXHIBIT P5     A TRUE COPY OF PROOF AFFIDAVIT FILED BY PLAINTIFF IN
              OS.NO.454/2011.

EXHIBIT P6     CERTIFIED COPY OF JUDGMENT PASSED IN O.S.NO.454/2011
              DATED 28.10.2015.

EXHIBIT P7     A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY PLAINTIFF BEFORE
              THE 1ST DEFENDANT AS PER THE BYE LAW DATED 19.3.2011.

EXHIBIT P8     A TRUE COPY OF I.A.NO.4503/2015 DATED 17.11.2015.

EXHIBIT P9     A TRUE COPY OF OBJECTION FILED TO EXHIBIT P-8 PETITION
              BY THE DEFENDANTS 2 TO 5.

EXHIBIT P10    A TRUE COPY OF ORDER PASSED IN I.A.NO.4503/2015 DATED
              20.7.2016.


RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------


           NIL




                                                TRUE COPY




                                               P.S. TO JUDGE



EL



                      A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.
                   =========================
                        O.P.(C).No.3330/2016
                   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
       Dated this the 4th day of January, 2017


                           J U D G M E N T

The petitioner aggrieved by the decree and judgment in O.S.No.454 of 2011 on the file of the court of the Additional Munsiff, Cherthala, filed a review petition. The review petition also stands dismissed. Ext.P6 is the judgment passed in O.S.No.454 of 2011 and Ext.P10 is the order passed in I.A.No.4503 of 2015 in O.S.No.454 of 2011. It is impugning these orders, the petitioner has approached this court.

2. The petitioner is having an appellate remedy as against the orders impugned. Therefore, this court is of the view that the petitioner is free to challenge the impugned orders in appeal. With liberty as above, the original petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE ms