The Malayala Manorama Company vs M.V. Govindan Master
2022 Latest Caselaw 6965 Ker

OP(C) NO. 3072 OF 2013
                                    1

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
  TUESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 24TH JYAISHTA, 1944
                      OP(C) NO. 3072 OF 2013
AGAINST THE ORDER DT.4.3.13 IN IA NO.163/2013 IN OS 117/2006
              OF III ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER/S:

            THE MALAYALA MANORAMA COMPANY
            P.B.NO.4278, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI-682036,
            REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING EDITOR PHILIP MATHEW.

            BY ADVS.
            SMT.SUMATHY DANDAPANI (SR.)
            SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI



RESPONDENT/S:

    1       M.V. GOVINDAN MASTER
            SECRETARY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT COMMITTEE COMMUNIST
            PARTY OF INDIA (MARXIST), LENIN CENTRE, KALOOR,
            KOCHI-682017.

    2       THE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT COMMITTEE COMMUNIST PARTY
            OF INDIA MARXIST
            LENIN CENTRE, KALOOR, KOCHI-682017, REPRESENTED BY
            ITS SECRETARY, SHRI M.V.GOVINDAN MASTER.


     THIS     OP   (CIVIL)    HAVING    COME   UP    FOR    ADMISSION    ON
14.06.2022,     THE   COURT    ON   THE   SAME      DAY    DELIVERED    THE
FOLLOWING:
 OP(C) NO. 3072 OF 2013
                             2

                         JUDGMENT

The original petition is filed to set aside Ext.P5

order passed by the Court of the Subordinate Judge,

Ernakulam. Even though this original petition was filed

as early as on 05.09.2013, the same has not been

admitted and no interim order has been passed.

The learned counsel appearing for the respondents

submits that the suit itself leading to Ext.P5 has already

been dismissed by the Trial Court, as early as on

05.09.2013. Therefore, the petitioner did not seek for

any further reliefs in this original petition. The said

submission is recorded. In the light of the dismissal of

the suit, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner

to challenge any subsequent order passed in the suit,

this original petition is dismissed as infructuous.

Sd/-

C.S.DIAS, JUDGE rkc/14.06.22