Disposed

Soman P.K. v. Gopalakrishnan

Kerala HC19 Apr 2016OP(C)/1172/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, plaintiff in another suit, sought delay in receiving the certified copy of the declined temporary injunction order. The High Court directed the lower court to issue the certified copy expeditiously, within three days, and continued the interim injunction until issuance.

What did the court decide?

Directed the court below to issue the certified copy of the order on I.A.No.516 of 2016 within three days and continued the interim injunction.

Soman P.K. Vs Gopalakrishnan — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF APRIL 2016/30TH CHAITHRA, 1938

¶5

OP(C).No. 1172 of 2016 (O)

¶6

PETITIONER

¶7

SOMAN P.K. AGED 78 YEARS, S/O.LATE KESAVAN, RESIDING AT THAMARASERIL HOUSE, MAMPARA MURI, PERUNADU VILLLAGE, RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.K.SHAJ SRI.SAJJU.S

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. GOPALAKRISHNAN AGED 60 YEARS, S/O.SREEDHARAN, RESIDING AT THAMARASERIL PURAYIDAM, GURURNADHAN MANNU, CHITTAR, SEETHATHODU VILLAGE, KONNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689645.

¶11

2. B.PREMUMAR

¶12

AGED 53 YEARS, S/O.BHANU, RESIDING AT LAHEYIL HOUSE, CHEMPOLIL, VECHOOCHIRA, CHETHAKKAL VILLAGE, RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, 689645.

¶13

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19-04-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

OP(C).No. 1172 of 2016 (O)

¶15

` APPENDIX

¶16

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶17

----------------------EXHIBIT-P1: THE TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.NO.73 OF 2016 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, RANNI. EXHIBIT-P2: THE TRUE COPY OF THE I.A.NO.516/2016 IN O.S.NO.73 OF 2016 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, RANNI. EXHIBIT-P3: THE TRUE COPY OF INTERIM ORDER DATED 18/03/2016 IN I.A.NO.516/2016 IN O.S.NO.73 OF 2016 ON TEH FILE OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, RANNI. EXHIBIT-P4: THE TRUE COPY OF OBJECTION FILED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT IN I.A.NO.516/2016 IN O.S.NO.73 OS 2016 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, RANNI. EXHIBIT-P5: THE TRUE COPY OF COMMISSION REPORT IN O.S.NO.73 OF 2016 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, RANNI.

¶18

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

NIL

TRUE COPY

P.A TO JUDGE

SMM

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J.

¶24

O.P.(C) No.1172 of 2016

¶25

Dated 19^th April, 2016.

¶26

J U D G M E N T

¶27

The petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.No.73 of 2016 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Ranni. The said suit is one for injunction. Along with the suit, the petitioner filed I.A.No.516 of 2016 seeking an order of temporary injunction. It is seen that an ad interim order of injunction was granted to the petitioner on the above interlocutory application on 18.3.2016. Later, the application for temporary injunction was heard and dismissed on 12.4.2016. The complaint of the petitioner is that though he has applied for a certified copy of the order on I.A.No.516 of 2016, he is yet to receive the same. According to the petitioner, on account of the delay on the part of the court below in issuing the certified copy of the order, he is unable to challenge the said order in appeal.

¶28

In the circumstances, having regard to the facts

¶29

O.P.(c) No.1172 of 2016

¶30

¶31

and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to direct the court below to issue the certified copy of the order on I.A.No.516 of 2016 applied for by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The interim order of injunction originally granted to the petitioner on 18.3.2016 will continue until the certified copy of the order is issued to the petitioner as directed.

¶32

The original petition (civil) is disposed of as above.

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.

¶35

tgs

¶36

(true copy)

Soman P.K. v. Gopalakrishnan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Soman P.K. v. Gopalakrishnan

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

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs K.K.Mammad

P.a.Ramesh Kumar Vs Krishnan Nair

.M. Geetha Vs K.M. Vijayalakshmi

Phalgunan N.K. Vs Wilson Joseph

K.K.Narayanan Vs K.Vijayan

B.v.Krishnan Vs C.a.Subbaraman