The High Court of Kerala dismissed a civil petition filed on grounds of non-prosecution because the petitioner failed to appear or take steps to complete service of notice despite prior directions. The court treated the lack of representation as evidence of lack of interest in pursuing the matter.
The petition was dismissed for non-prosecution.
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.RAMAKRISHNAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016/26TH SRAVANA, 1938
OP(C).No. 1031 of 2010 ( )
I.A. NO.2181/2010 IN OS. NO.341/2008 OF PRL. SUB COURT, THALASSERY.
PETITIONER/1ST DEFENDANT:
T.J. RINIL ROLENCE, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O. JOHN VINCENT, SUPALITHA NILAYAM, ONDEN ROAD, KANNUR.
BY ADVS.SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS, SMT.P.K.PRIYA.
RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFFS & DEFENDANTS 2 AND 3:
1. SURAJ KUMAR SUMITRAN, AGED 47 YEARS, PRESENTLY EMPLOYED AND RESIDENT AT SHARJAH,, P.B. NO.40269, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES, REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY
P.C. JOY SUNDAR, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O. KUNHIKANNAN, RESIDING AT HOUSE
NO. CW 35/4055, ONDEN ROAD, KANNUR-670 001.
2. MARIE NICOLE BENNEFIN ALIAS MARIE NICOLE BOOLY, RESIDENT OF 49, AMSTRONG RISE, CHARLTON ANDOVER, HAMSHIRE, ENGLAND, UNITED KINGDOM, REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY P.C. JOY SUNDAR, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O. KUNHIKANNAN, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.CW 35/4055, ONDEN ROAD, KANNUR-670 001.
3. ARCHIBOLD LEO PRINCELY T.J., S/O. JOHN VINCENT BETHEL, EDAPPAL AMSOM, THEYYAM DESOM, P.O. EDAPPAL, MALAPPURAM-679 576.
4. MISS LILLY CHEERAN, NO.2, ST. GEORGE'S ROAD, RHOS-ON-SEA, COLWYN BAY, LL 28 4HG, NORTH WALES, UNITED KINGDOM.
R1 & R2 BY ADVS. SRI.E.K.MADHAVAN,
SMT.P.VIJAYAMMA. R3 BY ADV. SRI.A.L.GEORGE.
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17-08-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
rs.
K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J.
O.P.(C) No.1031 of 2010
Dated this the 17th day of August, 2016
JUDGMENT
Even today there is no representation for the petitioner. Steps to 4th respondent has not been taken in spite of time granted as per order dated 11.8.2016. When the case came up in the defect list on 11.8.2016, this court has passed the following order.
“No representation for the petitioner. Petitioner is directed to take steps to complete service on R4 within a week. If step is not taken within time, the petition will stand dismissed for non prosecution. If step is not taken, Registry is directed to post the case in the defect list on 17.8.2016. If step is taken, post the case on 30.8.2016.”
Even today there is no representation and steps has not been taken as directed. That shows that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the petition. So the petition is dismissed for nonprosecution.
Sd/- (K. Ramakrishnan, Judge)
//True Copy//
P.A. to Judge
ss
T.J. Rinil Rolence
Suraj Kumar Sumitran
P.C. Joy Sundar
Marie Nicole Bennefin Alias Marie Nicole Boly
Archibold Leo Princely T.J.
Miss Lily Cheeran
K. Ramakrishnan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
