Asokan vs Kalathil Rugmini
2022 Latest Caselaw 10503 Ker

OP(C) NO. 1707 OF 2011
                                     1


              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
  FRIDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 15TH ASWINA, 1944
                       OP(C) NO. 1707 OF 2011
  AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OS 176/2010 OF SUB COURT /
          COMMERCIAL COURT (KALPETTA), SULTHANBATHERY
PETITIONER/S:

         ASOKAN, S/O. KELAPPAN, ERIVELI HOUSE, KANHIRANGAD
         AMSOM,, THONDERNADU DESOM, P.O.MAKKIYAD,,
         MANANTHAVADY TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT.

         BY ADVS.
         SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI
         SMT.SMITHA GEORGE


RESPONDENT/S:

   1     KALATHIL RUGMINI, WIFE OF BHASKARAN NAMBIAR,KALATHIL
         VEEDU,, P.O.VIMALANAGAR, MANANTHAVADY AMSOM,,
         OZHAKKODY DESOM, MANANTHAVADY TALUK. 670 645.

   2     SUMEGE @ SUMESH SON OF RUGMINI, KALATHIL VEEDU,
         P.O.VIMALANAGAR,, MANANTHAVADY AMSOM, OZHAKKODY
         DESOM,, MANANTHAVADY TALUK. 670 645.

   3     SUBHASH SON OF RUGMINI, KALATHIL VEEDU,
         P.O.VIMALANAGAR,, MANANTHAVADY AMSOM, OZHAKKODY
         DESOM,, MANANTHAVADY TALUK. 670 645.

         BY ADV SRI.ABRAHAM MATHEW VETTOOR


       THIS    OP   (CIVIL)    HAVING    COME   UP    FOR    ADMISSION    ON
07.10.2022,      THE   COURT    ON   THE   SAME      DAY    DELIVERED    THE
FOLLOWING:
 OP(C) NO. 1707 OF 2011
                              2


                         JUDGMENT

The original petition is filed challenging the order

in I.A.No.791/2010 in O.S.No.176/2010 (Ext.P4) of the

Court of the Subordinate Judge, Sulthan Bathery.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that, his

application, seeking an order of attachment before

judgment was dismissed by the court below.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the

respondents submits that the suit itself was dismissed

on 12.12.2013. In the light of the above submission, I

am of the view that nothing further survives in the

original petition.

In the result, without prejudice to the right of the

petitioner to work out his remedies in accordance with

law, the original petition is dismissed as infructuous.

Sd/-

C.S.DIAS, JUDGE rkc/07.10.22