Kerala High Court
Babu John vs A.K.Ramakrishnan on 18 March, 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE 2018 / 30TH JYAISHTA, 1940
OP(C).No. 1433 of 2018
E.A.NO.16/2018 IN E.A.NO.2/2018 IN E.P.NO.24/2008 IN O.S.NO.30/2003 OF
SUB COURT, NEDUMANGAD
---------
PETITIONER/APPLICANT/JD:
BABU JOHN,
AGED 58 YEARS, S/O.JOHN,
IDEAL COTTAGE, MRA-83-A,
PAROTTUKONAM, NALANCHIRA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 015.
BY ADVS.SRI.VINCENT JOSEPH
SRI.SABU GEORGE
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/DH:
A.K.RAMAKRISHNAN,
S/O.ANANNDHA NARAYANAN, TC 25/342,
AMMANKOVIL ROAD, PUTHENCHANTHA,
VANCHIYOOR VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 035.
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 20-06-2018, ALONG WITH OP(C) NO.1435 OF 2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
sts
21/6/2018
OP(C).No. 1433 of 2018 (O)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 18.03.2016 IN
FAO NO.27 OF 2014 AND FAO NO.306 OF 2013 BEFORE
THIS HON'BLE COURT.
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 24.10.2016
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER IN E.P.NO.24 OF 2008 IN
O.S.NO.30 OF 2003 ON THE FILE OF THE SUB COURT,
NEDUMANGAD.
EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF E.P.NO.22 OF 2016 IN O.S.NO.209 OF 2010
ON THE FILE OF THE SUB COURT, NEDUMANGAD.
EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 31.10.2016 IN E.A.NO.94
OF 2016 IN E.P.NO.22 OF 2016 IN O.S.NO.209 OF 2010 ON
THE FILE OF THE SUB COURT, NEDUMANGAD.
EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF E.A.NO.16 OF 2018 DATED 19.02.2018 IN
E.A.NO.2 OF 2018 IN E.P.NO.24 OF 2008 IN O.S.NO.30 OF
2003 ON THE FILE OF THE SUB COURT, NEDUMANGAD.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE
sts
21/6/2018
SATHISH NINAN, J.
-----------------------------------
O.P.(C) Nos.1433 & 1435 of 2018
------------------------------------
Dated this the 20th day of June, 2018
JUDGMENT
By these Original Petitions, the petitioner seeks for an early consideration of E.A.No.16/2018 and E.A.No.17/2018 pending on the files of the Sub Court, Nedumangad. These applications are filed by the petitioner seeking permission to serve notice to the respondent by paper publication. The petitioner is the judgment debtor in a suit for money. The contention is that in execution of the decree, he has paid amounts in excess of the decree amount. Therefore, he claims re-fund of the excess amount.
2. In the said proceedings, as is revealed from the report, service of notice to the respondent-decree holder is not yet complete. The decree holder was being represented by a Power of Attorney holder, who is reported to be no more.
3. Considering the facts and circumstances, I feel that the prayer of the petitioner seeking paper publication cannot be considered at the present stage. Attempts will have to be made O.P.(C) Nos.1433 & 1435 of 2018 2 to effect service of notice on the respondent-decree holder in his address. However, I direct the court below to expedite the proceedings.
This Original Petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
SATHISH NINAN, JUDGE sd