[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Sidhi vs Harrisons Malayalam Limited on 12 January, 2026
Author: T.R. Ravi
Bench: T.R.Ravi
2026:KER:1658
OP(C) NO. 2320 OF 2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI
MONDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 / 22ND POUSHA, 1947
OP(C) NO. 2320 OF 2025
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.08.2025 IN CMA NO.22 OF
2024 OF SUB COURT, SULTHANBATHERY
PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS:
1 SIDHI
AGED 81 YEARS
W/O. LATE SIDHA,
RESIDING AT NEDUMKARANA DIVISION,
ARAPETTA ESTATE, MEPPADI POST,
MUPPAINAD VILLAGE, VYTHIRI TALUK,
WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN - 673577
2 PUTTUCHENNAN @ MADHAVAN
AGED 60 YEARS
S/O. LATE SIDHA,
RESIDING AT NEDUMKARANA DIVISION,
ARAPETTA ESTATE, MEPPADI POST,
MUPPAINAD VILLAGE, VYTHIRI TALUK,
WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN - 673577
3 SIDHARAJAN
AGED 57 YEARS
S/O. LATE SIDHA,
RESIDING AT NEDUMKARANA DIVISION,
ARAPETTA ESTATE, MEPPADI POST,
MUPPAINAD VILLAGE, VYTHIRI TALUK,
WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN - 673577
4 SRUTI @ KEMPAN
AGED 54 YEARS
S/O. LATE SIDHA,
RESIDING AT NEDUMKARANA DIVISION,
ARAPETTA ESTATE, MEPPADI POST,
MUPPAINAD VILLAGE, VYTHIRI TALUK,
2026:KER:1658
OP(C) NO. 2320 OF 2025
2
WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN - 673577
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.R.VENKATESH
SMT.ASHA P.KURIAKOSE
SMT.LAKSHMI MEENAKSHI P.R.
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2:
1 HARRISONS MALAYALAM LIMITED
ARAPETTA ESTATE, MEPPADI POST,
MUPPAINAD VILLAGE, VYTHIRI TALUK,
WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN - 673577
2 JAYA
AGED 48 YEARS, W/O. RAMAMOORTHI,
JAYA NIVAS, RIPPON POST,
PUTHIYAPADI, MEPPADI,
MUPPAINADU VILLAGE, VYTHIRI TALUK,
WAYANAD, PIN - 673577
BY ADVS.
SHRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR
SHRI.K.JOHN MATHAI
SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN
SRI.KURYAN THOMAS
SHRI.PAULOSE C. ABRAHAM
SHRI.RAJA KANNAN
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12.01.2026,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2026:KER:1658
OP(C) NO. 2320 OF 2025
3
T.R. RAVI, J.
--------------------------------------------
O.P.(C). No.2320 of 2025
--------------------------------------------
Dated this the 12th day of January, 2026
JUDGMENT
The original petition has been filed seeking to set aside
Exts.P10 & P12 and allow Ext.P8 RP.I.A.No.31/2023 in
O.S.No.499/1990 on the file of the Munsiff Magistrate, Kalpetta.
The suit was filed by the 1st respondent against one deceased
Sidda, who is the father of the petitioners herein. The prayer in
the suit was for a direction to put the plaintiff in possession of
plaint B schedule property after identification of the same by the
Commissioner and for future mesne profits. The suit was twice
decreed ex parte and the said judgments were later set aside. It
is not necessary to list out the entire proceedings. By Ext.P7
order in FAO(RO) No.9/2023 this Court on 03.04.2023 dismissed
the appeal and remanded the matter for deciding on the issues
pertaining to the dispute which are not either answered or
adjudicated by the trial court. Thereafter, it is seen that the case
was listed on 05.06.2023, on which day it was adjourned to
21.06.2023. Both the parties were present on 21.06.2023 and
2026:KER:1658
OP(C) NO. 2320 OF 2025
the case was adjourned to 27.06.2023 for reporting settlement
since such a possibility was stated by the parties. On
03.07.2023, the case was again taken up for reporting
settlement, but the defendants did not appear. The court
proceeded to take the evidence of the plaintiff. The order would
show that the counsel had reported 'no instruction' on that day.
The defendants were hence set ex parte on 12.07.2023. The said
order was challenged in RP.I.A.No.31/2023 and the application
has been dismissed by Ext.P10 order. A reading of paragraph 4
of the order would show that the only reason for the dismissal is
that the defendants have remained absent for the third time in
the court when the case was listed for trial. Apparently, the court
was carried away by the absence to appear and the fact that the
suit was of 1990. However, the facts would reveal that the case
was listed on 03.07.2023 on the basis of the submission of the
parties that the matter would be settled. It is evident that on
03.07.2023 the counsel had reported 'no instruction' and the
defendants were set ex parte. Since the defendants have been
contesting the matter from 1990 and even in 2023 there was a
serious contest which had led to Ext.P7 judgment, it was not
2026:KER:1658
OP(C) NO. 2320 OF 2025
proper on the part of the court below to have set the defendants
ex parte immediately on a submission by the counsel that he has
no instruction. The parties are entitled to a decision on merits.
2. Ext.P10 was challenged in CMA No.22/2024
before the Sub Court, Sulthan Bathery and by Ext.P12 judgment,
the Appellate Court has dismissed the appeal. In paragraph 14 of
Ext.P12, the same reason stated by the trial court is reiterated
that the case is of 1990 and 35 years have elapsed and several
opportunities were granted to the defendants to contest the case.
It is also stated that no effort was taken by them which
apparently is not correct. It cannot also be taken as a case of
negligence on the part of the defendants since the case was
posted for reporting settlement at the instance of both the
parties.
In the above circumstance, Exts.P10 and P12 orders are
set aside. RP.I.A.No.31/2023 is allowed. The Munsiff Magistrate
Court, Kalpetta is directed to list the suit for trial and decide the
case on merits. It is made clear that neither parties will be
entitled to seek further time on the ground of settlement. Since
the matter is an old one, all endeavour shall be made to dispose
2026:KER:1658
OP(C) NO. 2320 OF 2025
of the suit within three months from the date of receipt of a
certified copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
T.R. RAVI
JUDGE
Pn
2026:KER:1658
OP(C) NO. 2320 OF 2025
APPENDIX OF OP(C) NO. 2320 OF 2025
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS NO. 499/1990
DATED 22.8.1999 FILED BEFORE THE COURT OF
MUNSIFF, KALPETTA
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT DATED
31.5.2023 FILED IN OS NO. 499/1990 DATED
22.8.1999 FILED BEFORE THE COURT OF
MUNSIFF, KALPETTA
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.07.2008
IN OS NO. 499/1990 OF THE LEARNED MUNSIFF
OF KALPETTA
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE DECREE DATED 12.8.2013 IN
AS NO. 34/2008 OF SUB COURT, SULTHAN
BAATHERY
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 13.1.2020
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 21.12.2022
IN A.S. NO. 34/2008 BEFORE THE SUB JUDGE,
SULTHAN BATHERY
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 3.4.2023
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 10.8.2023
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER STATEMENT DATED
5.12.2023 IN RPIA NO. 31/2023 FILED BY THE
1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 25.09.2024 IN
RPIA NO. 31/2023 PASSED BY THE TRIAL COURT
Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF CMA NO. 22/2024 FILED BY THE
PETITIONERS BEFORE THE SUB COURT, SULTHAN
BATHERY
2026:KER:1658
OP(C) NO. 2320 OF 2025
Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 19.08.2025 IN
