Kerala High Court
Padmini vs Babu on 10 November, 2014
Author: P.Bhavadasan
Bench: P.Bhavadasan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN
MONDAY,THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2014/19TH KARTHIKA, 1936
OP(C).No. 2598 of 2014 (O)
---------------------------
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OS 4025/2010 of II ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF
COURT, THRISSUR
PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONERS/DEFENDANTS:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. PADMINI, AGED 60 YEARS,
D/O.NEEROLI KOCHU, EDAKKUNNI VILLAGE & DESOM
THRISSUR DIST
2. ROMEO,
S/O.PADMINI, EDAKUNNI VILLAGE & DESOM, THRISSUR DIST
3. ABHILASH,
S/O.PADMINI, EDAKUNNI VILLAGE & DESOM, THRISSUR DIST
BY ADVS.SRI.P.SANTHOSH (PODUVAL)
SMT.R.RAJITHA
SRI.K.D.SREEVISAKH
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:
----------------------------------------------------
BABU,
S/O.LATE UNNI @ PRABHAKARAN, VILAKKATHARA HOUSE,
PADAVARDU DESOM, OLLUR, THRISSUR-680 306.
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-11-2014, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP(C).No. 2598 of 2014 (O)
---------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-------------------------------------
P1:- TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS 4025/2010 ON THE FILE OF IIND
ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF COURT, THRISSUR.
P2:- TRUE COPY OF WRITTEN STATEMENT IN OS NO 4025/2010 ON THE FILE OF
IIND ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF COURT, THRISSUR.
P3:- TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS IN OS 4025/10 ON THE FILE OF IIND ADDL.
MUNSIFF COURT, THRISSUR.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL
---------------------------------------
/TRUE COPY/
P.A. TO JUDGE
VPV
P.BHAVADASAN, J.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
O.P.(C)No.2598 of 2014
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dated this the 10th day of November, 2014
JUDGMENT
This is a petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:
"i) Direct the IInd Additional Munsiff Court, Thrissur to dispose of O.S.4025/2010 within a time limit as may be prescribed by this Hon'ble Court."
2. The petitioners are the defendants in O.S.No.4025/2010 before the II Additional Munsiff Court, Thrissur seeking for a declaration. He wanted to avoid the order in R.C.P.No.23/2001 as not binding on him.
3. The case was taken up for trial on 15.11.2013 on which date the plaintiff was examined and his evidence was closed. The defendants' evidence was closed on 10.12.2013 and the matter was posted for hearing on 11.12.2013. At that point of time, petition was filed for re-opening the evidence so as to enable the plaintiff to produce the records pertaining to the execution proceedings in O.S.No.136/1973 of Sub Court, Thrissur. That petition was allowed and the matter was adjourned awaiting records. Even after several postings the records are not received and the suit was being adjourned.
4. The grievance of the petitioners is that ever since then O.P.(C)No.2598 of 2014 2 except adjourning the case under one pretext or another, no steps have been taken by the plaintiff in the suit to have records produced. It is pointed out that this causes considerable difficulties to the petitioners who are the defendants in the suit and there may be a direction to the trial court to take up the matter and dispose it of as expeditiously as possible.
5. The grievance of the petitioners is fully justified. The petitioners have narrated the sequence of events before the court below. From 8.1.2014 onwards there have been at least 18 postings for the purpose of production of documents. Neither the documents produced nor any steps have been taken to have the documents procured.
6. In the light of the nature of the order that is proposed to be passed by this Court, notice to the respondent appears to be unnecessary.
The original petition is disposed of with a direction to the court below to take up O.S.No.4025/2010 and ensure that the order of the court below is complied with, and dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
P.BHAVADASAN JUDGE vpv