Vas Pharmaceuticals (India) Ltd vs G.P.Nair Family Trust
2022 Latest Caselaw 967 Ker

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                          PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
                             &
          THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
 TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 5TH MAGHA, 1943
                   OP(FT) NO. 1 OF 2021
 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OA 3/2015 OF I ADDITIONAL
   DISTRICT COURT & I ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS
                    TRIBUNAL ,PALAKKAD
PETITIONER:

          VAS PHARMACEUTICALS (INDIA) LTD
          OWNERS-G.P.NAIR PLANTATIONS,REPRESENTED BY
          VASUDEVAN K PANTHALATH,REGISTERED OFFICE-THOPPIL
          ESTATE,VYTTILA,KOCHI-682019.
          BY ADVS.
          SAM ISAAC POTHIYIL
          SMT.TINU JOHNSON
          SHRI.VISHNU DAS
          SRI. SRUTHI DAS
          SHRI.PHILIP ARUN M.N.
          SHRI.MOHAMED AMJAD K.M
          SMT.JISHMA K.S
RESPONDENTS:


    1     G.P.NAIR FAMILY TRUST
          REPRESENTED BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY
          HOLDER,K.G.KURUVILLA,KAYYALAKKADOM,
          KURUVENKONAM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003.
    2     STATE OF KERALA,
          REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO
          GOVERNMENT,FOREST DEPARTMENT,
          SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
    3     CUSTODIAN AND PRINCIPAL CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,
          FOREST OFFICE,VAZHUTHACAUD,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.
 O.P.(FT) No.1 of 2021              2



             BY ADVS.
             SRI.JAMES KURIAN
             SRI.MATHEW JOHN (K)
      THIS    OP    (FOREST   TRIBUNAL)   HAVING    COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION     ON   25.01.2022,   THE   COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 O.P.(FT) No.1 of 2021                 3




             P.B.SURESH KUMAR & C.S.SUDHA, JJ.
              -----------------------------------------------
                        O.P.(FT) No.1 of 2021
              -----------------------------------------------
          Dated this the 25th day of January, 2022.


                           JUDGMENT

P.B.Suresh Kumar, J.

The petitioner is the additional third respondent in

O.A.No.3 of 2015 on the files of the Additional District Court,

Palakkad. O.A.No.3 of 2015 is a proceedings instituted by the

first respondent through their power of attorney holder against

respondents 2 and 3 seeking a declaration in respect of the

property referred to therein. The petitioner, after getting

themselves impleaded as an additional respondent in the said

proceedings, filed Ext.P2 interlocutory application seeking

orders to adjudicate the veracity of the power of attorney

produced along with the original application and the locus

standi of the power holder of the original applicant, the first

respondent herein to institute the original application on their

behalf. Ext.P2 is stated to be an application filed on 12.1.2020.

On 4.1.2021, the petitioner filed O.P.(C) No.39 of 2021 for a

direction to the court below to consider and pass orders on

Ext.P2 application within a time limit to be prescribed by this

court. The said original petition was dismissed as withdrawn on

6.1.2021. This original petition is instituted thereafter for the

very same relief. The case set out by the petitioner in the

original petition is that since orders have not been passed on

Ext.P2 interlocutory application, the court below shall be

directed to pass orders on the said application within a time

limit.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as

also the learned counsel for the first respondent.

3. Ext.P2 application is seen to have been filed on

12.1.2020. In a proceedings in the nature of one referred to in

the original petition, the court is expected to pass orders only

when interlocutory applications are moved for orders, for all

interlocutory applications are not filed for urgent orders. Other

than the averment that orders have not been passed on Ext.P2

application so far, there is no pleading in the original petition as

to whether the petitioner has moved the court below for orders

on the said application at any point of time. The approach of

the petitioner to this court for a time bound disposal of Ext.P2

application even before moving the said application before the

court below does not appear to be bona fide. The original

petition, in the circumstances, is dismissed.

Sd/-

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.

Sd/-

C.S.SUDHA, JUDGE.

Mn

APPENDIX OF OP(FT) 1/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF O.A.NO.3/2015 PENDING BEFORE THE HON'BLE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT,PALAKKAD.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF I.A.NO.2/2020 IN O.A.NO.3/2015 PENDING BEFORE THE HON'BLE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT,PALAKKAD. EXHIBIT P3 CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER IN O.P(C)30/2021 BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF JUDGMENT IN O.P.1117/1998 DATED 27.9.1999 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA EXHIBIT P5 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF JUDGEMNT IN O.P.3907/2001 DATED 22.3.2001 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA EXHIBIT P6 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF ORDER DATED 11.2.2002 IN R.P.260/2001 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA EXHIBIT P7 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF GAZETTE NOTIFICATION NO.C4-21437/2000 DATED 26TH AUGUST, 2000 RESPONDENT EXHIBITS EXHIBIT R1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRP NO.259/1999 DATED 12.09.2001 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT EXHIBIT R1(B) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRP NO.1293/2000 DATED 12.09.2001 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT EXHIBIT R1(C) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 05.10.2006 IN M.F.A.NO.610/2003 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT EXHIBIT R1(D) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.

(C).NO.37660/2008 DATED 22.07.2010 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT