Dismissed

Sheela v. Maheswaran & Others

Kerala HC6 Jul 2009CRP/325/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court dismissed a civil revision petition seeking to quash an order allowing the withdrawal of a counter claim. The court held that commission reports and judicial admissions constitute part of the record and remain admissible in subsequent proceedings despite the status of the current suit.

What did the court decide?

The revision petition was closed without allowing the prayer for quashal of the impugned order.

Sheela Vs Maheswaran & Others — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 6TH JULY 2009 / 15TH ASHADHA 1931

¶5

CRP.No. 325 of 2009()

¶6

-----------------------------AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 05/04/2008 IN IA 4689 /2007 IN OS.544/2005 of ADDL.MUNSIFF COURT, ALAPPUZHA ....................

¶7

REVN. PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF IN THE SUIT/CR.PETITIONER IN IA ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

¶8

SHEELA, VELIMPARAMBIL VEEDU, NEERKUNNAM, ALAPPUZHA.

¶9

BY ADV. MR.A.KRISHNAN

¶10

RESPONDENTS/DEFENTANTS IN THE SUIT/PETITIONRS IN IA.

¶11

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

¶12

1. MAHESWARAN, NADUVILEVEEDU, NEERKUNNAM, ALAPPUZHA.

¶13

2. MANIKKUTTAN, NADUVILEVEEDU, NEERKUNNAM, ALAPPUZHA.

¶14

3. NALINAKSHAN, NADUVILEVEEDU, NEERKUNNAM, ALAPPUZHA.

¶15

4. RATHEESH, NADUVILEVEEDU, NEERKUNNAM, ALAPPUZHA.

¶16

¶17

THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/07/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

rs.

¶19

S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J.

¶20

C.R.P.No.325 OF 2009

¶21

Dated this the 6^th day of July 2009

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

Revision is filed by the plaintiff in O.S 544/2005 on the file of Additional Munsiff's Court,

¶24

Alapuzha. Suit was filed for injunction. The defendants in the suit are the respondents. Defendants in their written statement raised a counter claim claiming a right of easement over a

¶25

way. When the suit came upfor trial, the defendants sought for withdrawal of the counter claim and that was allowed by the learned Munsiff. The order passed by the court allowing withdrawal of the counter claim is challenged in this revision.

¶26

2. After having heard the counsel at length

¶27

C.R.P.No.325 OF 2009 2

¶28

and perusing the impugned order, I find the challenges raised against the order granting permission for withdrawal of the counter claim cannot be appreciated. Admittedly the suit filed by the plaintiff in which the counter claim was

¶29

raised after trial was dismissed. Petitioner/plaintiff has preferred an appeal against the the dismissal of the suit which is now pending. The apprehension raised by the counsel is

¶30

that after withdrawing the counter claim the defendants may file a fresh suit and in that suit the plaintiff will not be in a position to rely upon the commission report and other admissions made by the defendants in the previous suit. I do not find any merit in the submission. A commission report is a piece of evidence collected by the court by deputing an officer or an advocate of the bar. Once a commission report is filed before the court even if the suit is dismissed or withdrawn it

¶31

C.R.P.No.325 OF 2009 3

¶32

is part of the record of the court. The only requirement is proving the report in accordance with law. Similarly if any admission was made by the defendants in the written statement by raising counter claim it also amounted to a judicial admission and it can also be taken advantage in any other proceeding. The revision is found to be devoid of any merit, and it is closed.

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE

¶35

//TRUE COPY//

¶36

P.A TO JUDGE

¶37

vdv

Sheela v. Maheswaran & Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sheela v. Maheswaran & Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shine Kumar Vs James & Others

Nazeema Vs K.M.Nazeer

K.G.Sunil Dutt Vs Fr. K.P.Varghese and Others

E.Kunhikrishnan Nair Vs Komath Puthiyaveetil Balakrishnan Nair

Anju P Vs Deepak Rajan

Chatterjee Vs Subi