M/S.Capital Retreat Pvt. Ltd vs Gopakumar B Nair
2022 Latest Caselaw 176 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                   PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
        TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 21ST POUSHA, 1943
                          OP(C) NO. 56 OF 2022
   AGAINST THE ORDER IN CS 73/2021 OF PRINCIPAL SUB COURT / COMMERCIAL
                             COURT, THRISSUR
PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF:

           M/S.CAPITAL RETREAT PVT. LTD
           HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT TC 31/527 (1)
           CHAKKAI PETTAH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN 695 024
           REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN MR RAJMOHAN.
           BY ADVS.
           E.ADITHYAN
           THEJAN RAJ


RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/DEFENDANT:

           GOPAKUMAR B NAIR,
           AGED 57 YEARS
           S/O. LATE BALAKRISHNAN NAIR,
           RESIDENT 5A, SKYLINE PLAZA APARTMENTS VELLAYAMBALAM,
           SASTAMANGALAM P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 010.

     THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.01.2022, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 OP(C) NO. 56 OF 2022
                                 2




                           JUDGMENT

Dated this the 11th day of January, 2022

The sole defendant in C.S.73/2021 pending before the

Principal Sub Court (Commercial Court), Thiruvananthapuram

is aggrieved in the matter of non-granting of time prayed for

by the defendant for cross-examining an official witness to

prove one document in this case.

2. As per the admitted case of the petitioner itself as

stated in paragraph 7 of this petition, it could be gathered that

the opportunity given by the trial court for cross-examining

witness was not made use of by the petitioner and the

petitioner sought for adjournment. According to the learned

counsel for the petitioner, it is at this juncture, the trial court

recorded no cross. Anyhow, no materials placed before this

Court to substantiate his contention. At the time of hearing

this matter on admission, it is submitted by the learned

counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has filed another OP(C) NO. 56 OF 2022

petition today before the trial court for recalling the witness for

the purpose of cross-examination. Therefore, the petitioner is

satisfied with a direction to the trial court to consider and pass

appropriate orders in the above petition.

3. The crux of the dispute is confined to denial of one

more opportunity sought for by the petitioner to cross-

examine the witness. Therefore, I am inclined to dispose of

this Original Petition after dispensing notice to the other side,

with a direction to the trial court to consider and pass orders in

the petition filed by the petitioner for recalling the witness.

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the

petitioner that I.A.No.8/2021 seeking permission to defend the

case filed by the petitioner also is pending. The trial court is

directed to dispose of the same also in view of the spirit of the

provision facilitating the defendant put up his evidence to

support the defence case. Needless to say that the petitioner

shall be bear the entire cost for summoning the witness again. OP(C) NO. 56 OF 2022

Registry is directed to forward a copy of this judgment to

the court below concerned, within seven days, for compliance

and information.

This Original Petition (Civil) stands disposed of.

Sd/-

A. BADHARUDEEN JUDGE nkr OP(C) NO. 56 OF 2022

APPENDIX OF OP(C) 56/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT FILED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 15/3/2021 CS 73/2021 PRINCIPAL SUB COURT TVM.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT DATED 23.12.2019 PRODUCED BEFORE THE HONOURABLE SUB COURT (COMMERCIAL COURT) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT DATED 10.12.2020 PRODUCED BEFORE THE HONOURABLE SUB COURT (COMMERCIAL COURT) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. Exhibit P4 THE COMPUTER COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10/1/2022 PASSED BY THE HONOURABLE SUB COURT,(COMMERCIAL COURT) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.