M/S. Peevees Enterprises v. Muhammed Ashraf
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA TUESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE 2015/2ND ASHADHA, 1937 CRP.No. 246 of 2014 ----------------------------- OS.NO.256/2008 OF SUB COURT, COCHIN -------------------- RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS/REVISION PETITIONERS : -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. M/S. PEEVEES ENTERPRISES, SOLE PROPRIETORSHIP REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR M.V.MAHAMOOD, S/O. P.V.IBRAHIM, 37/1094, D-STERLING ESTATE, KUMARANASAN ROAD, KALOOR, KOCHI.
2. M.V.MAHAMOOD, S/O. P.V.IBRAHIM, 37/1094, D-STERLING ESTATE KUMARANASAN ROAD, KALOOR, KOCHI.
BY ADVS.SRI.JOHNSON MANAYANI SRI.JEEVAN MATHEW MANAYANI PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT :
------------------------------------------------------- MUHAMMED ASHRAF, S/O. ABDULLA MAULAVI, CHATHOTH, MOOTTAMMAL PULOOPI, KANNADIPARAMBU AMSOM, KANNUR-670 604. BY ADVS. SRI.JOHNSON ABRAHAM SRI.NELSON ABRAHAM THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PJ
B. KEMAL PASHA, J.
````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` C.R.P. No.246 of 2014 ````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 23rd day of June, 2015
O R D E R
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Order dated 25.06.2013 in I.A.No.6/2013 in O.S.No.256/2008 of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Kochi is under challenge. Through the said order, the court below has granted permission to the respondent herein to continue the proceedings as an indigent person.
2.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondent.
3.
According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the court below has not properly considered the question whether the respondent could be permitted to continue the proceedings as an indigent person. 4.
Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent has pointed out that the court below has considered all the matters and even the government has no
CRP.246/2014 : 2 :
complaint as against the permission granted by the court below.
5.
On a perusal of the impugned order and on hearing both sides, I do not find any illegality, irregularity or impropriety in the impugned order. The C.R.P. is devoid of merits and is only to be dismissed, and I do so. In the result, this C.R.P. is dismissed.
Sd/- (B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE) aks/23/06 // True Copy // PA to Judge