Disposed

Kerala State Construction Corporation Ltd. v. Justin.K.George

Kerala HC2 Mar 2018OP(C)/625/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition under Article 226 sought a direction for the trial court to dispose of an interlocutory application setting aside a Commission Report before commencement of evidence. The High Court ordered the trial court to dispose of the application without delay before the summer vacation closure and suspend evidence proceedings until such orders are passed.

What did the court decide?

The High Court directed the trial court to dispose of I.A. No.865/2018 setting aside the Commission Report without delay and not to commence evidence until such orders are passed.

Kerala State Construction Corporation Ltd. Vs… — 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

FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 11TH PHALGUNA, 1939

¶5

OP(C).No. 625 of 2018

¶6

OS.NO.175/2014 OF SUB COURT-1,ERNAKULAM

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/DEFENDANTS 1 & 2:

¶8

1 KERALA STATE CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION LTD, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, DOOR NO.30/1521 A, B, BAY UNDER THE BRIDGE, NORTHERN SIDE OF THE RAILWAY, ERNAKULAM VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER.

¶9

2 THE REGIONAL MANAGER, KERALA STATE CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, NEAR MUNICIPAL BUS STAND, KANNUR, PIN:670 001.

¶10

BY ADV.SRI.M.V.THAMBAN

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/PLAINTIFF AND DEFENDANTS 3 AND 4:

¶12

1. JUSTIN.K.GEORGE, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O GEORGE, KOTTUKAPALLY HOUSE, MADATHIL, IRITTY (P.O), PAYAM VILLAGE, IRITTY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN:670 703.

¶13

2. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, ROADS AND BRIDGES, NORTHERN CIRCLE, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN:670 003.

¶14

3. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, ROAD DIVISION, KANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN:673 001.

¶15

R2 & R3 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.I.JOHNSON

¶16

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02-03-2018,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

sts

¶18

6/3/2018

¶19

OP(C).No. 625 of 2018 (O)

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶22

EXHIBIT P1:	TRUE COPY OF FILES OF THE	THE PLAINT IN OS NO.175/2014 ON THE HON'BLE SUB COURT-I, AT ERNAKULAM.
EXHIBIT P2:	TRUE COPY OF THE IST AND THE FILES OF	THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY 2ND DEFENDANT IN OS NO.175/2014 ON THE HON'BLE SUB COURT-I, AT ERNAKULAM.
EXHIBIT P3:	TRUE COPY OF COMMISSIONER ON THE FILES	THE REPORT OF THE ADVOCATE SR.R.HARIKRISHNAN IN OS NO.175/2014 OF THE HON'BLE SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM.
EXHIBIT P4:	TRUE COPY OF 1 AND 2 AGAI	THE OBJECTION FILED BY DEFENDANTS NST EXHIBIT P3 COMMISSION REPORT.
EXHIBIT P5:	TRUE COPY OF FILES OF THE	I.A.NO.865/2018 IN OS NO.175/2014 ON THE HON'BLE SUB COURT AT ERNAKULAM.
EXHIBIT P6:	TRUE COPY OF THE FILES OF	I.A.NO.928/2018 IN O.S.NO.175/2014 ON THE HON'BLE SUB COURT AT ERNAKULAM.
EXHIBIT P7:	TRUE COPY OF THE FILES OF	I.A.NO.929/2018 IN O.S.NO.175/2014 ON THE HON'BLE SUB COURT AT ERNAKULAM.

¶23

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:

NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

sts 6/3/2018

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J .

¶29

O.P.(C) No. 625 of 2018

¶30

Dated this the 2^nd day of March, 2018

¶31

JUDGMENT

¶32

The prayers in this Original Petition (Civil) filed under the enabling provisions of Article 227 of the Constitution of India are as follows :

¶33

“To direct the Hon'ble Sub Court-I, Ernakulam to hear and dispose of Ext.P5 interlocutory application (I.A. No.865/2018 in O.S. No.175/2014) before proceeding with the evidence of the suit.”

¶34

Heard Sri.M.V. Thamban, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri. M.I. Johnson, learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents 2 and 3. In the nature of the orders proposed to be passed in this petition, notice to the 1^st respondent will stand dispensed with.

¶35

Sri.M.V. Thamban, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the limited direction sought for by the petitioners in this case is only for a direction from this Court to ensure that the trial court concerned (Sub Court-I, Ernakulam) will hear and dispose of Ext.P5 I.A. No.865/2018 in O.S. No.175/2014

¶36

OP(C) : 625 of 2018

¶37

-:2:-

¶38

for setting aside the Commission Report, without much delay and that until then, the evidence in the case may not commence.

¶39

Based on the request of this Court, Registry has secured telephonic information from Sub Court-I, Ernakulam that Ext.P5 I.A. No.865/2018 in O.S. No.175/2014 is now posted to 03.03.2018 for hearing and that 30 days time would be required for dispose of that I.A. and that in view of the ensuing summer vacation time up to 30.06.2018 would be required. Accordingly, taking note of the facts and circumstances in this case it is ordered that the Sub Court-I, Ernakulam will take up all reasonable measures for consideration of Ext.P5 I.A. No.865/2018 in O.S. No.175/2014 and after affording an opportunity of being heard to both sides, will pass orders thereon without much delay, preferably well before 15.06.2018 (closing of courts for summer vacation) or at any rate before 30.06.2018.

¶40

The said court shall not take the case for evidence until orders are passed on Ext.P5 I.A. No.865/2018 in O.S. No.175/2014 and the case may be listed for trial depending upon the outcome of the decision that is to be taken on Ext.P5 application. The

¶41

OP(C) : 625 of 2018

¶42

-:3:-

¶43

petitioner will produce a certified copy of this judgment before the trial court for necessary information.

¶44

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

¶45

Sd/- ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE

¶46

ttb

Kerala State Construction Corporation Ltd. v. Justin.K.George

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kerala State Construction Corporation Ltd. v. Justin.K.George

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

Chandramathy Vs the Taluk Land Board, Taliparamba

M/S. Peevees Enterprises Vs a. Aliyar Kunju

Jino Paul Vs the Land Tribunal (Devaswom)

Sadasivan Nair Vs S.Harikumar

M.Gopinathan Vs K.K.Ashok Kumar

Sheela Vs Nil