Dismissed

Chinnamma v. Elias

Kerala HC7 Sept 2009WP(C)/6029/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the High Court dismissed the plea challenging the Munsiff Court's order declining admission of photocopies as evidence in a suit regarding immovable property rights. The Court found no impropriety or illegality in such a refusal, stating the petition lacked merit, reserving the right of the petitioners to produce certified copies.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to produce certified copies.

Chinnamma Vs Elias — Civil Procedure and Limitation | 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 7TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 16TH BHADRA 1931

¶5

WP(C).No. 6029 of 2009(O)

¶6

------------------------------------AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 29/01/2009 IN IA.189/2008 IN OS.6/2007 of MUNSIFF COURT, KOLENCHERRRY

¶7

PETITIONER(S):

¶8

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

¶9

1. CHINNAMMA, AGED 76 YEARS, W/O.C.T. CHERIAN, KOCHUMANGALATH HOUSE, KUNNATHUNAD TALUK, AIKKARANADU NORTH VILLAGE.

¶10

2. C.T. CHERIAN, AGED 78 YEARS, S/O. THOMMI, KOCHUMANGALATH HOUSE, KOLENCHERRY DO...DO...

¶11

BY ADV. MR.T.MADHU

¶12

RESPONDENT(S):

¶13

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

¶14

1. ELIAS, AGED 63 YEARS, S/O. VARKEY, MUNDAYIL HOUSE, PERINGOL KARA, AIKKARANADU NORTH VILLAGE, KOLENCHERY.

¶15

2. THANKACHAN, S/O. ELIAS, AGED 42 YEARS, MUNDAYIL HOUE, PERINGOL KARA, AIKKARANADU NORTH VILLAGE,KOLENCHERY.

¶16

3. SHRI. THAMPI, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O. ELIAS, MUNDAYIL HOUSE, PERINGOL KARA, DO..DO.

¶17

R1 TO R3 BY ADV. MR.BASIL MATHEW.

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

WP(C) NO. 6029/2009-O

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶22

EXT.P1: COPY OF THE I.A. NO.189/2008 IN O.S. NO.6/2007 DATED 26/06/2008 OF THE HONOURABLE MUNSIFF'S COURT, KOLENCHERRRY.

¶23

EXT.P2: COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.4461, DATED 28/06/1995 OF THE S.R.O. PUTHENCRUZ.

¶24

EXT.P3: COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT IN I.A. NO.189/2008 IN O.S.6/2007 DATED 17/07/2008 OF THE HONOURABLE MUNSIFF'S COURT, KOLENCHERRRY.

¶25

EXT.P4: COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A. NO.189/2008 IN O.S. NO.6/2007 DATED 29/01/2009 OF THE HONOURABLE MUNSIFF'S COURT, KOLENCHERRRY.

¶26

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

rs.

S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J.

¶31

W.P.(C).No.6029 of 2009 - O

¶32

Dated this the 7^th day of September, 2009

¶33

J U D G M E N T

¶34

The writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

¶35

“To call for the records relating to Ext.P4 and by the issuance of a writ of certiorari, quash and set aside the same.”

¶36

Petitioners are the plaintiffs in O.S.No.6 of 2007 on

¶37

the file of the Munsiff Court, Kolenchery. Suit is one for declaration of a right over a way and also for consequential injunction. Petitioners/plaintiffs produced some photocopies to substantiate their suit claim with a petition to receive them in evidence. Learned Munsiff noting that the documents are photocopies, dismissed that petition. Propriety and correctness of that order is challenged in the writ petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

¶38

I heard the learned counsel on both sides.

¶39

Having regard to the submissions made and perusing

¶40

Ext.P4 order challenged in the writ petition, I find no impropriety

¶41

¶42

W.P.(C).No.6029 of 2009 - O

¶43

or illegality in the order passed by the court below declining to receive photocopies produced by the plaintiffs in evidence, especially, when such photocopies related to transactions involving immovable properties.

¶44

Writ petition lacks merit and it is dismissed reserving the right of the petitioners to produce certified copies of the documents.

¶45

S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE.

¶46

bkn/-

Chinnamma v. Elias

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chinnamma v. Elias

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

Shamnath a.Rahim Vs Seena

Rajasekharan Nair Vs Daisy Mathew

George Vs Babu Varghese & Another

Chinnamma Vs Elias

Joseph Raj Jestus Vs Nirmala Simson etc.

M.a.Malika Vs State of Kerala