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 4]

Kerala High Court

V.N.Gopalakrishnan Nair vs M.K.Radhakrishnan on 4 August, 2017

Author: A.Hariprasad

Bench: A.Hariprasad

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALAAT ERNAKULAM

                                               PRESENT:

                          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD

                    FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF AUGUST 2017/13TH SRAVANA, 1939

                                     OP(C).No. 2067 of 2017 (O)
                                         ---------------------------
                         OS NO.248/2017 of MUNSIFF'S COURT, PERUMBAVOOR

PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF:
-----------------------

               V.N.GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR,
                AGED 64 YEARS,S/O.LATE NARAYANAN NAIR,
                RESIDING AT VARIKKATHOUSE,KARATTUPALLIKKKARA,
                PERUMBAVOOR.P.O,PERUMBAVOOR VILLAGE,
                KUNNATHUNADU TALUK,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

                      BYADV. SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS

RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS:
-------------------------

       1.            M.K.RADHAKRISHNAN,
                      AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,S/O.KRISHNAN NAIR,MADATHIL
                     PUTHENVEEDU,PATTALA,IRINGOLE.P.O,IRINGOLE KARA,
                      PERUMBAVOOR VILLAGE,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683542.

       2.            SRI.B.RAGHUKUMAR,(RETURNING OFFICER),
                      ADVOCATE, PERUMBAVOOR,PERUMBAVOOR.P.O,
                     RESIDING ATPLAMKUDI HOUSE,RAYAMANGALAM
                     VILLAGE,RAYAMANGALAM KARA,
                     KUNNATHUNADU TALUK,KURUPPUMPADI.P.O,
                      ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683542.

       3.            THE FINE ARTS SOCIETY(REGD.)PERUMBAVOOR,
                      REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,PERUMBAVOOR.P.O,
                      KUNNATHUNADU TALUK,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683542.


                      R1 & R 3 BY ADV.SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN

            THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLYHEARD ON 04-08-2017, THE COURT ON
THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

OP(C).No. 2067 of 2017 (O)
---------------------------

                                       APPENDIX

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
EXHIBIT P1          TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.248/2017 ON THE FILE OF MUNSIFF'S
COURT,PERUMBAVOOR

EXHIBIT P2          TRUE COPY OF INJUNCTION APPLICATION AS I.A.NO.1366/2017 IN
O.S.248/2017.

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




                                       //TRUE COPY//



                               A.HARIPRASAD, J.
                          --------------------------------------
                            O.P.(C) No.2067 of 2017
                          --------------------------------------
                 Dated this the 4th day of August, 2017

                                    JUDGMENT

Heard the learned counsel on both sides.

2. Petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.No.248 of 2017 before the Court of Munsiff, Perumbavoor. He has approached this Court for the following reliefs:

"(i) Issue an order directing the 1st respondent shall not assume the Post of President of 3rd respondent society till the disposal of the Original Petition (Civil).
(ii) Allow the Original Petition with costs.
(iii) Grant such other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to grant in the facts and circumstances of the case."

3. It is the case of the petitioner that the 1st respondent is evading the process of the court and playing a hide and seek game. Per contra, learned counsel for the 1st respondent submitted that there was no sitting before the court below on the date fixed for appearance and therefore he could not appear before the court. It is also submitted that he had no intention to stay away from the court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the 1st respondent has assumed the post of president of 3rd respondent society on OP(C) No.2067 of 2017 2 06.07.2017. It is also submitted that a contempt of court case has been filed against the 1st respondent. Therefore, the fact that he has taken charge as the president of 3rd respondent society is virtually admitted.

Considering the facts and circumstances, I find that the issues involved in this petition no longer survive. Therefore, this original petition is closed as infructuous. Court below shall consider the injunction application as expeditiously as possible.

A. HARIPRASAD, JUDGE.

cks