Disposed

Bijimole Rasheed v. Ranni Block Panchayat

Kerala HC7 Jan 2016OP(C)/3187/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the trial court to allow production of relevant documents in custody of the respondent upon payment of Rs.10,000 costs, and further directed allowance of recall of witnesses if such production is permitted. The corporation petition was disposed of with these directions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner allowed to get documents produced from respondent's custody on payment of Rs.10,000 costs; recall of witnesses allowed if document production permitted.

Bijimole Rasheed Vs Ranni Block Panchayat — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.ABRAHAM MATHEW

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/17TH POUSHA, 1937

¶5

OP(C).No. 3187 of 2015 (O)

¶6

OS 49/2010 OF SUB COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA

¶7

PETITIONER(S):

¶8

BIJUMOLE RASHEED, AGED 33 YEARS, W/O. RASHEED, KARACKAL KIZHAKKETHIL, T.B. ROAD, PARAKODE MURI, ADOOR VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.K.SHAJ

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

RANNI BLOCK PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, RANNY P.O., RANNY VILLAGE, RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT- 689 672.

¶12

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

¶14

OP(C).No. 3187 of 2015 (O)

¶15

APPENDIX

¶16

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶17

P1TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S 49 OF 2010 OF THE SUB COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA

¶18

P2TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT IN O.S 49/2010 BEFORE THE SUB COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶19

P3TRUE COPY OF THE I.A 925/2015 IN O.S 49/2010 OF THE SUB COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶20

P4TRUE COPY OF THE I.A. 1001/2015 IN O.S 49/2010 OF THE SUB COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶21

P5TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION IN I.A 925/2015 IN O.S 49/2010 OF THE SUB COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶22

P6TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION IN I.A 1001/2015 IN O.S 49/2010 OF THE SUB COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶23

P7TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30/11/2015 IN I.A 925/2015 IN O.S 49/2010 OF THE SUB COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶24

P8TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30/11/2015 IN I.A 1001/2015 IN O.S 49/2010 OF THE SUB COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶25

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

NIL.

/ TRUE COPY /

P.S. TO JUDGE

K.ABRAHAM MATHEW J.

¶31

O.P.(C)No.3187 of 2015

¶32

Dated this the 7^th day of January, 2016

¶33

JUDGMENT

¶34

Petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.No.49 of 2010 of Sub Court, Pathanamthitta. He filed Ext P4 application to recall DW1 and DW2 and Ext P3 application for a direction to the respondent to produce certain documents. The applications have dismissed.

¶35

Heard.

¶36

I have no doubt that the learned Sub Judge rightly dismissed the applications. But it is found that to avoid miscarriage of justice the petitioner should be allowed to get some documents produced. These documents are in the custody of the respondent. A list has been filed in this court . The petitioner may file it before the trial court. If the trial court finds that any of the documents are relevant, it shall allow it on payment of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand only) as costs.

¶37

In the result, this Original Petition is disposed of with the above direction. If the application for production of documents is allowed, the learned Sub Judge shall allow the petitioner to recall DW1 or DW2.

¶38

Sd/- K.ABRAHAM MATHEW JUDGE

¶39

cms

¶40

/True copy/ P.S.to Judge

Bijimole Rasheed v. Ranni Block Panchayat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bijimole Rasheed v. Ranni Block Panchayat

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

C.K.Rajalakshmi Vs M.K.Satheeshan

Shanis T.M Vs State of Kerala

M.Abdul Rahim Vs J. Vijay Kumar

P.K.Mohammed Basheer Vs P.K.Zachariah

T.T.Mathew Vs K.D.Sebatin

Sureshkumar Vs Satheesan