P.M. Kuriakose vs Kunjamma Kochuparambil
2021 Latest Caselaw 943 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN

    MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 21TH POUSHA, 1942

                         OP(C).No.72 OF 2021

  I.A.NO.3082/2018 IN OS 598/2015 OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF COURT
                           KOTTAYAM

                                  ......

PETITIONER:
               P.M. KURIAKOSE
               AGED 47 YEARS
               S/O P.U.MATHEW PALAKUDIYIL HOUSE,
               PALLAOM.P.O, NATTAKAM VILLAGE,KOTTAYAM
               THALUK,REP.BY P.O.A HOLDER M.P BABU AGED 50 YEARS
               S/O.PUNNOOSE,MANIYALA VEEDU
               THRIKOTHAMANGALAM PUTHUPALLY,
               KOTTAYAM-686007.

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.JOY C. PAUL
               SRI.BOBBY GEORGE

RESPONDENTS:

      1        KUNJAMMA KOCHUPARAMBIL
               AGED 78 YEARS
               W/O PUNNOOSE CHACKO,
               KOCHUPARAMBIL VEEDU,PALLAOM.P.O,
               NATTAKAM VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM THALUK-686007.

      2        ABRAHAM.K,
               AGED 53 YEARS
               S/O PUNNOOSE,KOCHUPARAMBIL VEEDU, PALLAOM.P.O,
               NATTAKAM VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM THALUK-686007.

      3        PUNNOOSE KOCHUPARAMBIL,
               AGED 63 YEARS
               S/O PUNNOOSE CHACKO,KOCHUPARAMBIL VEEDU,
               PALLAOM.P.O, NATTAKAM VILLAGE,
               KOTTAYAM THALUK(DIED),PIN-686007.


     THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.01.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                      SATHISH NINAN, J.
            ==================
                   O. P. (C) No.72 of 2021
            ==================
           Dated this the 11th day of January, 2021

                               JUDGMENT

Exts.P6 and P8 orders seeking remission of

Commissioner's Report and amendment of the plaint respectively, are under challenge in this original

petition.

2. Exts.P6 and P8 orders are dated 27.10.2018

and 28.03.2019, respectively. The suit is one for

injunction and stands listed for trial to this day.

I do not consider it appropriate to entertain this

original petition challenging Exts.P6 and P8 orders

at this distance of time and when the suit is

listed for trial.

The original petition is liable to be dismissed

and I do so.

SATHISH NINAN JUDGE

kns/-

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED 17/09/2015 FILED BEFORE MUNSIFF COURT,KOTTAYAM IN O.S.NO.598/2015

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT FILED BEFORE MUNSIFF COURT,KOTTAYAM IN O.S.NO.598/2015

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER CLAIM BY THE DEFENDANTS FILED BEFORE MUNSIFF COURT,KOTTAYAM IN O.S.NO.598/2015

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE OFFICE COPY OF THE COMMISSION REPORT DATED 13/12/2017 FILED BEFORE MUNSIFF COURT,KOTTAYAM IN O.S.NO.598/2015

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION TO COMMISSION REPORT FILED BEFORE MUNSIFF COURT,KOTTAYAM IN O.S.NO.598/2015

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.NO.3082/2018 IN O.S.NO.598/2015 DATED 27/10/2018

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE AMENDMENT APPLICATION AS I.A.596/2019 IN O.S.598/2015

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.NO.596/2019 IN O.S.NO.598/2015 FILED BEFORE MUNSIFF COURT,KOTTAYAM.

.........