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 0]

Kerala High Court

Meethale Periattath Premanandan Aged ... vs Meethale Panayullathil Abdulla

Author: Thomas P.Joseph

Bench: Thomas P.Joseph

       

  

  

 
 
                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT:

               THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH

        WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH 2013/29TH PHALGUNA 1934

                       OP(C).No. 988 of 2013 (O)
                       --------------------------
     I.A.NO.511 OF2013 IN O.S.NO.48 OF 2001 OF SUB COURT, VADAKARA

     PETITIONER(S):
     ----------------

       MEETHALE PERIATTATH PREMANANDAN AGED 63 YEARS
       S/O.KUNHIKANNAN NOW RESIDING AT THIRUVATHIRA HOUSE CHOROADE
       AMSOM DESOM
       VATAKARA TALUK KOZHIKODE DISTRICT PIN 673 542

       BY ADVS.SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN
               SMT.GEETHA P.MENON
               SRI.N.AJITH
               SRI.P.B.SUBRAMANYAN

     RESPONDENT(S):
     -------------

          1. MEETHALE PANAYULLATHIL ABDULLA, AGED 59 YEARS
       S/O.MOIDEEN NOW RESIDING AT CHETTIAMVEETTIL PONMERI AMSOM
       PARAMBIL DESOM
       VATAKARA TALUK KOZHIKODE DISTRICT PIN 673 542

          2. MEETHALE PANAYULLATHIL MOIDEEN
       S/O.ABDULLA RESIDING AT PONMERI AMSOM PARAMBIL DESOM VATAKARA
       TALUK KOZHIKODE DISTRICT PIN 673 542

      R1  BY ADV. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN
      R1  BY ADV. SMT.A.R.PRAVITHA
      R2  BY ADV. SRI.MAHESH V RAMAKRISHNAN

       THIS OP (CIVIL)  HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD  ON  20-03-2013, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

OP(C).No. 988 of 2013 (O)         2



                             APPENDIX




 PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS



     EXT.P1      DATED 29-11-2012 TRUE COPY OF THE I.A NO 1397 OF 2012
                 IN I.A NO 1375 OF 2009 IN IA NO 7 OF 2005 IN O.S  NO
                 48 OF 2001 SUB COURT VATAKARA

     EXT.P2      DATED 22-02-2013 TRUE COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL COUNTER
                 STATEMENT IN IA NO 1375 OF 2009 IN IA NO 7 OF 2005 IN
                 O.S  NO 48 OF 2001 SUB COURT VATAKARA

     EXT.P3      DATED 28-02-2013 TRUE COPY OF OBJECTION TO EXT.PO2
                 FILED BY RESPONDENT NO 1

     EXT.P4      DATED 28-2-2013 TRUE COPY OF OBJECTION TO EXT.P2 FILED
                 BY RESPONDENT NO 2

     EXT.P5      DTD 07.03.2013, ORDER IN I.A.NO.511 OF 2013 IN
                 O.S.NO.48 OF 2001 OF SUB COURT, VARAKARA



 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL



                                                           true copy /


                                                           P.A to Judge



                    THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J.
          =========================
                     O.P(C).No.988 of 2013
         ============================
           Dated this the 20th day of March, 2013

                         J U D G M E N T

Petitioner/decree holder challenges Ext.P5, order dated 07.03.2013 on I.A.No.511 of 2013 in O.S.No.48 of 2001 of the Sub Court, Vadakara.

2. Petitioner obtained a decree for specific performance and attempted executing that decree. First respondent made a claim over the property vide I.A.No.1375 of 2009 contending that the suit property belongs to him as per Ext.A1, gift deed. In support of that claim, first respondent gave evidence and asserted that he is known by name Abdulla (Ext.A1, gift is in favour of one Avulla). Thereafter, first respondent filed I.A.No.1397 of 2012 to receive a certificate issued by the Village Officer certifying that 'Abdulla' and 'Avulla' are one and the same person. Pursuant to that, petitioner filed I.A.No.511 of 2013 to receive additional counter statement disputing the said claim of the first respondent. That application was dismissed by the learned Sub Judge.

3. Learned Senior Advocate contends that in view of I.A.No.1397 of 2012 and the document produced along with that, learned Sub Judge ought to have received additional counter. O.P(C).No.988 of 2013 2

4. Learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2 contended that evidence in the case was closed on 26.11.2012 and it is in the year, 2013 that petitioner sought additional counter to be received vide I.A.No.511 of 2013.

5. I must notice that it is pursuant to I.A.No.1397 of 2012 that petitioner wanted additional counter to be filed. In view of the stand first respondent is taking in I.A.No.1397 of 2012, petitioner is entitled to dispute that claim of the first respondent. In that view of the matter, learned Sub Judge ought to have allowed I.A.No.511 of 2013.

Resultantly this original petition is allowed as under:

(i) Ext.P5, order dated 07.03.2013 on I.A.No.511 of 2013 in O.S.No.48 of 2001 of the Sub Court, Vadakara is set aside.

(ii) I.A.No.511 of 2013 is allowed. Additional counter filed by the petitioner is received.

(iii) It is open to the parties to adduce further evidence if any consequent to the reception of additional counter.

Sd/-

THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE Sbna