This original petition challenged orders directing a petitioner to produce a Will and summon documents. The court held such steps unnecessary as the petitioner conceded the main reliefs, allowing suit disposal without trial. Impugned orders set aside.
Ext P9 order set aside. Ext P10 order set aside to the extent it relates to summoning certified copies.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.ABRAHAM MATHEW
THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/5TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937
OP(C).No. 2620 of 2015 (O)
OS 13/2014 SUB COURT, KOCHI
PETITIONER/1ST DEFEDANTS(SOLE APPEARING DEFENDANT) :
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------
SMT.MEENA L.THAKKER, AGED 78 YEARS, RESIDING AT 528, EAST COAST ROAD, OCEAN PARK, SINGAPORE - 458 969.
BY ADVS.SRI.SREELAL N.WARRIER SRI.M.S.AMAL DHARSAN
RESPONDENTSPLAINTIFF & DEFENDANTS 2 TO 5 :
1. SRI.PRADEEP LAXMIDAS THAKKER RESIDING AT JAI JAGADISH BUILDING, N.S.ROAD NO.5IST FLOOR, FLAT NO.4, PLOT NO.8 BEHIND COOPERHOSPITAL, JUHU SCHEME, VILE PARLE MUMBAI -400058.
2. SMT. RITA BHARAT GANDHI 73, JUHU GAURAV, GULMOHAR CROSS ROAD NO.11 OPP:SAURASHTRA SOCIETY, J.V.P.D., MUMBAI -400049.
3. SRI. AMBRISH L THAKKER 528, EAST COAST ROAD, OCEAN PARK SINGAPORE -458 969.
4. SMT. SMITA YOGESH ADHIA MAHARAJA SURJAMAL, FLAT NO.7, 3RD FLOOR JUHUVERSOVA LINK ROAD, ANDHERI WEST, MUMBAI - 53.
5. SMT. CHETAN L.THAKKER
JAI JAGADISH BUILDING PLOT NO.8, FLAT NO.3 N.S.ROAD NO.5 IST FLOOR, VILE PARLE (W) MUMBAI - 400056.
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26-11-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
bp
OP(C).No. 2620 of 2015 (O)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
: NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A.TO JUDGE
bp
K.ABRAHAM MATHEW J.
O.P.(C) No.2620 of 2015
Dated this the 26th day of November, 2015
JUDGMENT
Petitioner is the first defendant in O.S.No.13 of 2014 of Sub Court, Kochi. First respondent is the plaintiff. The suit is for certain reliefs in respect of a power of attorney allegedly executed by the plaintiff and some of the defendants in favour of the 5th respondent and a release deed allegedly executed by the 5th respondent in favour of the petitioner-first defendant on the strength of the power of attorney. There is also a prayer for direction to deposit Rs.13,00,000/-. The petitioner alone filed a written statement . She has no objection to the prayers being granted in respect of the above two documents.
O.P.(C) No.2620 of 2015 2
produce the Will notwithstanding the objection raised by the petitioner. This order is challenged. The first respondent also filed Ext P5 application to receive copies of certain documents and filed Ext P6 application to direct the custodian of the documents, which is a bank, to produce certified copies of those documents. Those applications also have been allowed inspite of the objections raised by the petitioner. Correctness of this order also is challenged.
O.P.(C) No.2620 of 2015 3
In the result, this Original Petition is allowed in part. Ext P9 order is set aside. Ext P10 is also set aside to the extent it relates to summoning of documents.
Sd/- K.ABRAHAM MATHEW JUDGE
cms
/True copy/ P.S.to Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the order directing production of a Will was necessary when the petitioner had no objection to the suit reliefs.
Whether applications to summon documents were unnecessary given that the suit could be disposed of without a trial.
Meena L. Thakker
Pradeep Laxmidas Thakker
Rita Bharat Gandhi
Ambrish L Thakker
Smita Yogesh Adhija Maharaj Surjamal
Chetan L. Thakker
K. Abraham Mathew
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
