T.V.Sasikala vs C.P.Joseph
2021 Latest Caselaw 629 Ker

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 629 Ker
Judgement Date : 7 January, 2021

Kerala High Court

T.V.Sasikala vs C.P.Joseph on 7 January, 2021

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN

    THURSDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 17TH POUSHA, 1942

                        OP(C).No.1860 OF 2020

       AGAINST THE ORDER IN OS 92/2011 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB
                         COURT,ERNAKULAM


PETITIONERS:

      1        T.V.SASIKALA, AGED 63 YEARS
               W/O.P.P.VISHNUDAS, SHANKARA NILAYAM, THYEKKEKOYIKKAL,
               NEAR CHEPPANAM BUND, PANANGADU P.O., ERNAKULAM
               DISTRICT-682506.

      2        P.P.VISHNUDAS, AGED 63 YEARS
               S/O.P.V.PURUSHOTHAMAN, SHANKARA NILAYAM,
               THYEKKEKOYIKKAL, NEAR CHEPPANAM BUND, PANANGADU P.O.,
               ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682506.

               BY ADV. SRI.J.JAYAKUMAR

RESPONDENT:

               C.P.JOSEPH, S/O.PERU, CHEMBAKASSERY, CHEPPANAM,
               PANANGADU P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682506.


     THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.01.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 OP(C).No.1860 OF 2020

                                     2



                        Sathish Ninan, J.
                ==============================
                   O.P.(C) No.1860 of 2020
                  ==========================
           Dated this the 07th day of January, 2021

                                  JUDGMENT

The Advocate Commissioner was appointed

without hearing the petitioners - defendants,

laments the petitioners.

2. Commission was also sought to be issued at

the instance of the plaintiff, to ascertain the

alleged acts of violation of the order of interim

injunction committed by the defendants.

3. Appointment of an Advocate Commissioner for

ascertaining the alleged acts of violation is

justified. The order appointing the Commissioner

need not be set aside for the sole reason that the

petitioners were not heard. The interests of the

petitioners could be adequately safeguarded by

granting them liberty to file a work memo before the

Advocate Commissioner, pointing out the matters OP(C).No.1860 OF 2020

which they may require to be ascertained from their

side. The Advocate Commissioner shall ascertain the

matters as may be so sought for by the defendants,

in addition to the matters sought for by the

plaintiff.

With the above directions the original petition

is disposed of.

Sd/-

Sathish Ninan, Judge

vdv OP(C).No.1860 OF 2020

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.01.2017 IN OP(C)NO.2030/2015 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 11.12.2017 IN I.A.NO.5155/2017 IN O.S.NO.92/2011 OF II ADDL.SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31.01.2020 IN OP(C)NO.3605/2017 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF I.A.NO.1/2020 IN O.S.NO.92/2011 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE IIND ADDL.SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM ON 08.09.2020.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF I.A.NO.2/2020 IN O.S.NO.92/2011 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE IIND ADDL.SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM ON 08.09.2020.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 20.10.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER AGAINST I.A.NO.1/2020 IN O.S.NO.92/2011 BEFORE THE IIND ADDL.SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM.

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 20.10.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER AGAINST I.A.NO.1/2020 IN O.S.NO.92/2011 BEFORE THE IIND ADDL.SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM.

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE E-COURT PROCEEDINGS IN O.S.NO.92/2011 BEFORE THE IIND ADDL.SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM.

EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF E-