Sasidharan Naik v. Balagopala Naik

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/20TH PHALGUNA, 1936 OP(C).No. 587 of 2015 (O) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S) :

--------------------------

1. SASIDHARAN NAIK, AGED 78 YEARS S/O.GOPALANAIKKAN, POZHANKAVIL, THEKKEMADOM PANANGAD DESOM, S.N.PURAM VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK, THRISSUR PIN - 680 665.

2. VIMALA AMMAL, AGED 73 YEARS, W/O.SASIDHARAN NAIK, POZHANKAVIL, THEKKEMADOM, PANANGAD DESOM S.N.PURAM VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK THRISSUR, PIN - 680 665.

BY ADVS.SRI.PRASUN.S SRI.PAUL MATHEW (PERUMPILLIL) SRI.N.V.RAJEEV RESPONDENT :

------------------------ BALAGOPALA NAIK, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.SASIDHARAN NAIK, POZHANKAVIL, THEKKEMADOM PANANGAD DESOM, S.N.PURAM VILLAGE, KODUNGALLOOR TALUK, THRISSUR PIN - 680 665.

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/-

OP(C).No. 587 of 2015 (O) ------------------------------------ APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :

------------------------------------- EXT. P1THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF I.A.NO.4010/2014 PREFERRED BEFORE IN O.S.NO.650 OF 2011 BEFORE THE ADDITIONAL SUB -COURT (II B), IRINJALAKKUDA.

EXT. P2THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE URGENT APPLICATION I.E. I.A. NO.446 OF 2015 DATED 9.2.2015 PRESENTED ON 10.2.2015 IN THE SAID A.S.NO.74 OF 2014 PREFERRED BEFORE THE IVTH ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT (IV B), THRISSUR.

EXT. P3TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.2.2015 IN I.A.NO.446 OF 2015 IN A.S.NO.74 OF 2014 OF THE IVTH ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT (IV B) THRISSUR.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL --------------------------------------------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Mn

P.BHAVADASAN, J.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - O.P.(C) No. 587 of 2015 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 11th day of March, 2015

J U D G M E N T

Report has been received from the court below. It is seen from the report that the deposition of PW1 and DW1 are not readable and the appellate court has to take the aid of legible readable copy prepared by the lower court. It is true that copy of a copy cannot be given. But then the petitioner before this Court is entitled to have a copy of the deposition and once it is stated that the originals are not readable and readable copies have been prepared, it is only just and proper that he be given a copy of the same. 2.

Therefore, this petition is allowed and the court below is directed to issue copy of a readable copy on proper application.

3.

It is also contended that I.A.No. 354/2015 has been filed by the petitioner for expediting the hearing of the appeal. It is directed that the lower appellate court may make every endeavour to dispose

O.P.(C) No. 587 of 2015 -2of the appeal as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

The copy of the deposition may be issued within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Sd/- P.BHAVADASAN JUDGE ds //True copy// P.A. to Judge