Disposed

Thankamani v. Joshy

Kerala HC5 Feb 2018OP(C)/322/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of an Original Petition (Civil) filed under Article 227 of the Constitution. It directed the Additional Sub Court, Irinjalakuda, to expedite the disposal of two specific appeals (AS No.14 of 2016 and AS No.31 of 2017) and the pending condonation of delay application.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Additional Sub Court, Irinjalakuda, to ensure early disposal of Appeal No.14 of 2016 and Appeal No.31 of 2017.

Thankamani Vs Joshy — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

MONDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 16TH MAGHA, 1939

¶5

OP(C).No. 322 of 2018

¶6

AS 14/2016 OF ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, IRINJALAKUDA

¶7

PETITIONER

¶8

THANKAMANI, AGED 72, W/O. ANDIYEKAL SUNDARAN, KALIKAKUNNU DESOM, POTTA VILLAGE, ELANJIPRA P.O, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR.

¶9

BY ADV.SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1. JOSHY,

¶12

AGED 54, S/O. KATUKUNNATHIL VELAYUDHAN, VALOOR DESOM, KALLUR THEKUMURY VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR - 680 001.

¶13

2. SATHI,

¶14

AGED 58, D/O. KATUKUNNATHIL VELAYUDHAN, VALOOR DESOM, KALLUR VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR - 680 001.

¶15

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05-02-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

sdr/-

¶17

OP(C).No. 322 of 2018 (O)

¶18

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶20

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN O.S NO 194 AND OF 2012 AND 328 OF 2012 DATED 26.9.2014 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, CHALAKUDY. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM IN AS NO 14 OF 2016 DATED 19.2.2015. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED IN IA NO. 805 OF 2017 IN AS NO 14 OF 2016 DATED 5.7.2017 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. SUB COURT, IRINJALAKUDA. EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE IA NO. 641 OF 2017 IN AS NO 31 OF 2017 DATED 3.3.2017. EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO EXT P4 DATED 7.7.2017. EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM IN AS NO 31 OF 2017 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL, SUB COURT, IRINJALAKUDA DATED 28.2.2017.

¶21

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS NIL

¶22

/TRUE COPY/

¶23

sdr/- PA TO JUDGE

¶24

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

¶25

¶26

O.P.(C) No.322 of 2018

¶27

¶28

Dated this the 5^th day of February, 2018

¶29

JUDGMENT

¶30

The main prayer in this Original Petition (Civil) filed under the enabling provisions contained in Article 227 of the Constitution of India is as follows :

¶31

“(i) issue an appropriate order or direction commanding the Addl. Sub Court, Irinjalakuda, to consider A.S.No.14 of 2016 and A.S.No.31 of 2017 and to decide everything relatable to the appeal including its maintainability or even the decision on merits and culminate the proceedings pertaining to the same within stipulated time limits as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court in the interest of justice.”

¶32

Heard Sri.Sreekumar.G.(Cherlur), learned counsel

¶33

appearing for the petitioner. In the nature of the orders proposed to be passed in this Original Petition (Civil), notice to the respondents will stand dispensed with.

¶34

At the request of this Court, the Registry has been telephonically informed by the office of the Additional Sub Court, Irinjalakuda, that A.S.No.14 of 2016 is now posted to 7.3.2018 and that A.S.No.31 of 2017 is not admitted and the delay condonation application is pending and further that if A.S.No.31 of 2017 is admitted after

¶35

: :2::

¶36

O.P.(C) No.322/18

¶37

condoning the delay, then both the Appeal Suits could be disposed of before the summer vacation.

¶38

Accordingly, it is ordered that the Additional Sub Court, Irinjalakuda, will take all reasonable endeavours possible under the circumstances to ensure the early disposal of the delay condonation application filed in A.S.No.31 of 2017 and notice in that regard should be permitted to be served by the petitioner on the parties through their respective Advocates who appeared for those parties before the court below concerned in A.S.No.31 of 2017. Then endeavours may be made by the Additional Sub Court, Irinjalakuda, to ensure the early disposal of the matters, as suggested by the lower appellate court. The petitioner will produce the certified copy of this judgment before the court below concerned for necessary information.

¶39

With these observations and directions, the Original Petition (Civil) will stand finally disposed of.

¶40

ALEXANDER THOMAS JUDGE

¶41

csl

Thankamani v. Joshy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thankamani v. Joshy

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

Rusha Anil Vs Manoj Kumar

Kottayil Susheela Vs Kottayil Sumitra

Usha Kumari.S Vs Sankara Narayanan Nair

George Jacob Pulickal Vs Surendhu Govindan

Beegum Farisa Vs Union Territory of Lakshadweep

Sidique Vs the Land Tribunal Tirur