Shaji vs V.G.Preman
2021 Latest Caselaw 2633 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN

     FRIDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 2ND MAGHA, 1942

                        OP(C).No.1268 OF 2020

    AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 27/07/2020 IN IA 3130/2019 & IA
  NO.3131/2019 IN OS 948/2013 OF PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, THRISSUR

                                -----


PETITIONER/DEFENDANT:

             SHAJI
             AGED 52 YEARS
             S/O CHERPUKARAN KOCHUKUTTAN, CHERUPUKARAN HOUSE,
             AMBALLUR VILLAGE, AMBALLUR DESOM, MUKUNDAPURAM
             TALUK, ALAGAPPA NAGAR P.O.THRISSUR-680 302.

             BY ADVS.
             SRI.C.A.CHACKO
             SMT.C.M.CHARISMA

RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF:

             V.G.PREMAN
             S/O VELLATTUPARAMBIL GOPALAN, AGED 60
             YEARS,VELLATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, VENGINISSERI DESOM,
             THRISSUR VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK, REPRESENTED BY
             HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, SURENDRAN, S/O
             VELLATTUPARAMBIL GOPALAN, AGED 64 YEARS,
             VELLATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, VENGINISSERY DESOM, PARALAM
             VILLAGE, VENGINISSERY P.O.THRISSUR VILLAGE,
             THRISSUR TALUK, PIN-680 563.

             R1 BY ADV. SRI.SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL
             R1 BY ADV. SMT.R.RAJITHA

     THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.01.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                    SATHISH NINAN, J.
          ==================
                O. P. (C) No.1268 of 2020
          ==================
         Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2021

                            JUDGMENT

The suit is for recovery of money due on a

dishonoured cheque. The defendant denied the issuance of the cheque. During the course of trial

he filed IA 3130/2019 seeking expert opinion as

regards the handwriting on the cheque along with IA

3131/2019 for reopening of the evidence. As per the

order impugned, the court has ordered that the

question of comparison of writings in the cheque

can be considered at the final stage of the suit.

Dissatisfied with the direction and apprehending

that the court may dispose of the suit without

considering his request, he has approached this

Court.

2. I am of the opinion that the interests of

the petitioner is adequately safeguarded in the

order impugned. There is no reason to assume that

after expressing that, the necessity for an expert

opinion will be considered at the final stage, the O. P. (C) No.1268 of 2020

Court will omit to do so. No directions are called

for.

Original petition is accordingly closed.

Sd/-

SATHISH NINAN JUDGE

kns/-

//True Copy//

P.S. to Judge OP(C).No.1268 OF 2020

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF PLAINT IN OS NO 948/2013 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, THRISSUR

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED IN OS NO 948/13

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF IA NO 3130/2019 FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 9.10.2019

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF IA NO 3131/2019 FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 9.10.2019

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 24.7.2020 IN IA NO 3130/19 & IA NO 3131/19 IN OS NO 948/2013 OF PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, THRISSUR

-----