Disposed

M/S Ponnore Enterprise LLP Represented by Its Poa Mr.Unaise .T v. Crown Polymers Represented by Its Proprietor Mr.Sailesh Kumar

Kerala HC1 Mar 2024OP(C)/90/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Plaintiff in a commercial suit challenged the trial court's refusal to re-open its evidence and permit further adduction. Reviewing the case diary, the High Court found the delay was not the plaintiff's fault, set aside the impugned order, allowed the re-opening application, and directed further evidence without further adjournment.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; plaintiff's application to re-open evidence allowed; further evidence to be adduced after 10 days without further adjournment.

M/S Ponnore Enterprise LLP Represented by… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 1^ST DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 11TH PHALGUNA, 1945

¶5

OP(C) NO. 90 OF 2024

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 19.12.2023 IN CS NO.69 OF 2022 OF ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT/PRINCIPAL SUB COURT / COMMERCIAL COURT, KOLLAM

¶7

PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF IN C.S.NO.69 OF 2022 IN THE FILED OF HON'BLE COMMERCIAL COURT AT KOLLAM:

¶8

M/S PONNORE ENTERPRISE LLP REPRESENTED BY ITS POA MR.UNAISE .T AGED 39 YEARS M/S PONNORE ENTERPRISES LLP, HAVING ITS BRANCH OFFICE PONNORE ENTERPRISES LLP, MANGAD, KOLLAM., PIN - 691010 BY ADV S.J.SHEMEER

¶9

RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT IN C.S.69 OF 2022 IN THE FILE OF HON'BLE COMMERCIAL COURT, KOLLAM:

¶10

CROWN POLYMERS REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR MR.SAILESH KUMAR

¶11

CROWN POLYMERS, INDUSTRIAL AREA, KULATHUR.P.O, TRIVANDRUM, PIN - 695583 BY ADV K.MOHANAKUMAR (POOJAPPURA)

¶12

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

O.P.(C).No. 90 of 2024

¶14

..2..

¶15

J U D G M E N T

¶16

Dated this the 1^st day of March, 2024

¶17

Petitioner herein is the plaintiff in the Commercial Suit, C.S.No.69/2022, pending before the Commercial Court, Kollam. The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P3 order, which refused Ext.P2 application to re-open the evidence of the plaintiff and to permit the plaintiff to adduce further evidence. Ext.P2 is seen dismissed vide

¶18

Ext.P3, for the reason that the petitioner was not vigilant in prosecuting the matter and was trying to protract the matter.

¶19

2. Heard the learned counsel for the

¶20

petitioner/plaintiff. Although, the respondent is duly served, there is no representation.

¶21

O.P.(C).No. 90 of 2024

¶22

..3..

¶23

3. The petitioner handed over the details of the e-court proceedings to this Court. It is true that, the matter was scheduled for trial in the month of October 2023, precisely on 04.10.2023. On 04.10.2023, the plaintiff was present and was examined as PW1; Exts.A1 to A5 were marked and summons was issued to witnesses and the case was adjourned to 16.10.2023. On 16.10.2023, the case was adjourned, awaiting fresh witness schedule, to 18.10.2023. On 18.10.2023, the matter was posted as 'Call on' to 21.10.2024. On 21.10.2023 also, the case was adjourned with endorsement 'call on' to 10.11.2023. The same was repeated on 10.11.2023, and the case was adjourned to 27.11.2023. On 27.11.2023, the case was again adjourned for return of summons to 05.12.2023, which is seen repeated on 05.12.2023 with the result, the case was adjourned to 12.12.2023. On 12.12.2023, case is seen adjourned for further evidence to 16.12.2023. On 16.12.2023, the court passed the following order:

¶24

O.P.(C).No. 90 of 2024

¶25

..4..

¶26

Plaintiff is represented. No witness is present. This is a listed matter of October. Defendant absent. No representation. Still the plaintiff seeks time without any grounds, and that cannot be allowed. Hence, evidence of the plaintiff is closed. As neither the defendant nor the counsel is present, defendant is placed exparte. For hearing plaintiff to

¶27

4. Accordingly, the plaintiff's evidence was

¶28

closed and the defendant was set ex-parte and the case was adjourned to 18.12.2023. On 18.12.2023, both the defendant and the plaintiff filed petitions, the former, to set aside the ex-parte order and the latter, to re-open the evidence (Ext.P2) and the case was adjourned to 19.12.2023. On 19.12.2023, Ext.P2 application was dismissed

¶29

for the reasons afore-referred and the I.A. filed by the defendant to set aside the ex-parte order was allowed. Thereafter also, the case was posted on several occasions and ultimately, the defendant's evidence was closed on 27.02.2024 and

¶30

O.P.(C).No. 90 of 2024

¶31

..5..

¶32

the case now stands posted for hearing to 04.03.2024.

¶33

5. From the above narrated events, it could be

¶34

seen that the plaintiff/petitioner was not at fault in delaying or protracting the matter, as found in Ext.P3 order. There was default on the part of the plaintiff/petitioner only on 16.10.2023. Ext.P3 order cannot be sustained on

¶35

any premise. The trial court should have allowed Ext.P2 and permitted the plaintiff to adduce further evidence.

¶36

6. In the light of the above discussion, Ext.P3 order will stand set aside and Ext.P2 application will stand allowed. The petitioner will adduce

¶37

further evidence on the date on which the matter is posted by the trial court, preferably after 10 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On the said date, the plaintiff will adduce whatever evidence he wants to let in,

¶38

O.P.(C).No. 90 of 2024

¶39

..6..

¶40

without seeking any further adjournment.

¶41

Thereafter, the case will be proceeded with in accordance with law and shall be disposed of at

¶42

the earliest.

¶43

The Original petition is disposed of, as above.

Sd/- JUDGE

C. JAYACHANDRAN

O.P.(C).No. 90 of 2024

¶48

..7..

¶49

APPENDIX OF OP(C) 90/2024

¶50

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 THE TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE POA DATED 26.11.2021 IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS EXHIBIT P1. Exhibit P2 THE TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE I.A PETITION NO: 4/2023 DATED 18.12.2023 SO FILED IN O.S.NO. 69/2022 IN THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE COMMERCIAL COURT, KOLLAM IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS EXHIBIT P2 Exhibit P3 THE TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A NO: 4/2023 DATED 19.12.2023 SO FILED IN O.S.NO. 69/2022 IN THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE COMMERCIAL COURT, KOLLAM IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS EXHIBIT P3.

M/S Ponnore Enterprise LLP Represented by Its Poa Mr.Unaise .T v. Crown Polymers Represented by Its Proprietor Mr.Sailesh Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Ponnore Enterprise LLP Represented by Its Poa Mr.Unaise .T v. Crown Polymers Represented by Its Proprietor Mr.Sailesh Kumar

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

State of Kerala Vs Kodoth Narayanan Nambiar

Aravindan Vs Divakaran

The Federal Bank Ltd. Vs Rajesh Vijayan

Jipsa.M Vs Gikku v.George

M/S. Christuraj Hospital Vs Jobin K Joseph

Vinodini Vs Ibrahim