High Court of KeralaOP(C)/3507/2012disposed of

Ajimon v. Lijo George

2015-05-25Honourable Mr. Justice A.Hariprasad3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MAY 2015/4TH JYAISHTA, 19372 OP(C).No. 3507 of 2012 (O) --------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN IA NO.4797/2011 IN OS NO. 627/2010 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,IRINJALAKUDA PETITIONER(S):

-------------------------- AJIMON, AGED 39 YEARS S/O.MANIKKUTTAN, VALUPARAMBIL THEKKETHIL HOUSE ARUNOOTTIMANGALAM DESOM, VETTIYAR VILLAGE MAVELIKKARA.

BY ADV. SRI.UNNIKRISHNAN.V.ALAPATT RESPONDENT(S):

---------------------------- (*) LIJO GEORGE, AGED 31 YEARS S/O.GEORGE, CHIRAKKAL HOUSE, PARIYARM VILLAGE PARIYARAM DESOM, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, PIN 691585. (*)ADDRESS OF RESPONDENT IS CORRECTED AS LIJO GEORGE, AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.GEORGE, CHIRAKKAL HOUSE, PARIYARAM VILLAGE, PARIYARAM DESOM, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER GEORGE CHIRAKKAL, C/O.JOSEPH, MENOTH HOUSE, PARIYARAM P.O., CHALAKKUDY,PIN 680 721 AS PER ORDER DATED 30.08.2013 IN IA NO.11530/2013 IN OP(C) 3507/2012. BY ADV. SMT.AMBILY (PREMKUMAR) THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25-05-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

OP(C) NO.3507/2012 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXT.P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN OS 351/2009 DATED 20.09.2010 EXT.P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 23.08.2011 EXT.P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 8.3.2012 IN IA NO.4797/2011 IN OS 627/2010 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:

NIL //TRUE COPY//

A.HARIPRASAD, J.

-------------------------------------- O.P.(C) No.3507 of 2012 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of May, 2015

JUDGMENT

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The challenge in this original petition is against Ext.P3 order. Suit filed by the petitioner was rejected by the court below as per Ext.P1 order for non-payment of balance court fee. Petitioner filed an application before the trial court under Order 47 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short, "CPC") seeking review of Ext.P1 order rejecting the plaint for non-payment of balance court fee. On the date of rejection of the plaint, the trial court dismissed another application for enlargement of time for reception of balance court fee. Now there is a decree passed by the court below on the basis of rejection of the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. The remedy of the petitioner is to approach the appellate forum with a regular appeal. Therefore, the original petition has become infructuous. Hence, it is disposed with liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum for redressal of his grievance. A. HARIPRASAD, JUDGE.

cks