Kerala High Court
Ramani vs Rajappan on 28 January, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN
THURSDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 8TH MAGHA, 1942
OP(C).No.1041 OF 2020
AGAINST THE ORDER IN I.A..11321 AND 11320 OF 2015 IN OS.105 OF
2010 DATED 29.06.2020 OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT ,IRINJALAKUDA
------------
PETITIONERS:
1 RAMANI
AGED 64 YEARS
W/O CHUKKIRYAN VELAYUDHAN,IRINJALAKUDA
DESOM,MANAVALASSERY VILLAGE,
IRINJALAKUDA.P.O,THRISSUR DISTRICT-680121.
2 JINUMON,
AGED 41 YEARS
S/O CHUKKIRYIAN VELAYUDHAN,
IRINJALAKUDA DESOM,MANAVALASSERY VILLAGE,
IRINJALAKUDA.P.O,THRISSUR DISTRICT-680121.
3 JITHU,
AGED 39 YEARS
S/O CHUKKIRYIAN VELAYUDHAN,IRINJALAKUDA
DESOM,MANAVALASSERY VILLAGE,IRINJALAKUDA.P.O,THRISUR
DISTRICT-680121.
4 JITHESH,
AGED 36 YEARS
S/O CHUKKIRYIAN VELAYUDHAN,
IRINJALAKUDA DESOM,MANAVALASSERY
VILLAGE,IRINJALAKUDA.P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680121.
BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
OP(C).No.1041 OF 2020 -2-
RESPONDENT:
RAJAPPAN
AGED 61 YEARS
S/O CHUKKIRIYAN AYYAKKUTTY,IRINJALAKUDA DESOM,
MANAVALASSERY VILLAGE,IRINJALAKUDA.P.O,
THRISSUR DISTRICT-680121.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.N.L.BITTO
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.01.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
SATHISH NINAN, J.
==================
O. P. (C) No.1041 of 2020
==================
Dated this the 28th day of January, 2021
JUDGMENT
The petitioners are the defendants in a suit
for a partition. An ex parte preliminary and final
decree were passed in the suit. The petitioners
filed applications seeking to set aside the ex
parte decree and also to condone the delay in
filing the application. For consideration of the
said applications, the petitioner sought issuance
of summons to certain witnesses and for production
of few documents.
2. The court noticed that summoning of witness
like the Village Officer and production of
documents like patta, mortgage deed etc. are
totally unnecessary for consideration of the delay
petition. The relevancy of the documents and
witnesses as sought for by the petitioners, in the
consideration of the application to condone delay,
could not be pointed out by the petitioners. The
court below was right in dismissing the
O. P. (C) No.1041 of 2020
application. There is no error of jurisdiction
warranting interference in this original petition.
Original petition fails and is accordingly
dismissed.
Sd/-
SATHISH NINAN
JUDGE
kns/-
//True Copy//
P.S. to Judge
OP(C).No.1041 OF 2020
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.N0.105 OF
2010 DATED 25.1.201O ON THE FILE OF THE
PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT,IRINJALAKUDA.
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED AS
I.A.NO.11318 OF 2015 IN O.S.NO.105 OF 2010
DATED 7.12.2015 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL
MUNSIFF COURT,IRINJALAKUDA.
EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED AS I A
NO.11319 OF 2015 IN O.S.NO.105 OF 2010 DATED
7.12.2015 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL
MUNSIFF COURT,IRINJALAKUDA.
EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED AS IA
NDO.11320 OF 2015 IN O.S.NO.105 OF 2010
DATED 7.12.2015 ON THE FILED OF THE
PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT,IRINJALAKUDA.
EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED AS
IA.NO.11321 OF 2015 IN O.S.NO.105 OF 2010
DATED 7.12.2015 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL
MUNSIFF COURT,IRINJALAKUDA.
EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED IN THE
APPLICATIONS FILED AS I.A.NO.11321 OF 2015
AND I.A.NO.11320 OF 2015 IN O.S.NO.105 OF
2010 DATED 29.6.2020 ON THE FILE OF THE
PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT,IRINJALAKUDA.
-----------
