Sukumar Thekkepat vs S. Vinod Kumar
2022 Latest Caselaw 959 Ker

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
 TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 5TH MAGHA, 1943
                     OP(C) NO. 138 OF 2022
     C.M.A.(ARB)NO.9/2021 ON THE FILE OF COMMERCIAL
             COURT(PRINCIPAL SUB COURT), ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER    :

         SUKUMAR THEKKEPAT
         AGED 54 YEARS
         PROPRIETOR, THEKKEPPATT FILMS,
         NO.204A, D.D. MISTY HILLS,
         KAKKANAD,
         ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682030
         BY ADVS.
         C.S.MANU
         DILU JOSEPH
         C.A.ANUPAMAN
         MANJU E.R.


RESPONDENT    :

         S. VINOD KUMAR
         AGED 43 YEARS
         PROPRIETOR, MINI STUDIO, PLOT NO. 20,
         MARIAMMAN KOIL STREET, CHIDAMBARAM NAGAR,
         RAMAPURAM, CHENNAI, PIN - 600089

     THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.01.2022,    THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 O.P.(C)No.138 of 2022                       ..2..




                        A.BADHARUDEEN, J.

        ------------------------------------------------------------
                        O.P.(C)No.138 of 2022
        ------------------------------------------------------------
           Dated this the 25th day of January, 2022

                           JUDGMENT

This original petition has been filed under Article

227 of the Constitution of India, when the petitioner felt

that the interim order passed against the interest of the

petitioner could not be vacated, by hearing both sides,

due to absence of the Presiding Officer in the court

concerned, in view of the pandemic situation.

2. In view of the said grievance, I have

obtained a report from the learned District Judge,

Ernakulam. It is reported by learned District Judge that the

Judge dealing with this matter would take charge on today.

Thus, it appears that the grievance of the petitioner in the O.P.(C)No.138 of 2022 ..3..

matter of non-availability of Judge to decide the dispute is

no more in existence.

Having considered the grievance of the

petitioner, this original petition is allowed. Therefore,

there shall be a direction to the learned Sub

Judge(Commercial Court), Ernakulam to pass orders in

I.A.Nos.1 of 2021 and 4 of 2021 in C.M.A.(Arb)No.9 of 2021

pending before the Commercial Court, Ernakulam at the

earliest, at any rate, within a period of two weeks from the

date of production or receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Sd/-

A.BADHARUDEEN, JUDGE rkj O.P.(C)No.138 of 2022 ..4..

APPENDIX OF OP(C) 138/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit1 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF THE C.M.A (ARB) NO. 9 OF 2021 FILED BEFORE THE COMMERCIAL COURT ( PRINCIPAL SUB COURT ), ERNAKULAM Exhibit2 TRUE COPY OF THE I.A. NO. 1 OF 2021 IN C.M.A (ARB) NO. 9 OF 2021 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE COMMERCIAL COURT (PRINCIPAL SUB COURT ), ERNAKULAM Exhibit3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF INJUNCTION IN I.A. NO. 1 OF 2021 PASSED BY THE COMMERCIAL COURT ( PRINCIPAL SUB COURT ), ERNAKULAM Exhibit4 TRUE COPY OF THE I.A. NO. 4 OF 2021 IN C.M.A (ARB) NO. 9 OF 2021 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE COMMERCIAL COURT (PRINCIPAL SUB COURT ), ERNAKULAM Exhibit5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF INJUNCTION IN I.A. NO. 4 OF 2021 PASSED BY THE COMMERCIAL COURT ( PRINCIPAL SUB COURT ), ERNAKULAM Exhibit6 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT IN I.A. 4 OF 2021 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE COMMERCIAL COURT ( PRINCIPAL SUB COURT ), ERNAKULAM Exhibit7 TRUE COPY OF THE DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT DATED 6-3-2020 ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND M/S QUEEN MARY INTERNATIONAL FILMS