K.Jayachandran v. M.Leela Bai

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN MONDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/9TH CHAITHRA, 1937 OP(C).No. 887 of 2015 (O) ------------------------------ (O.S.1560/2006 OF 3RD ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM) PETITIONER:

-------------- K.JAYACHANDRAN, AGED 68 YEARS, ADVOCATE, RESIDING AT "KRISHNA", THONDUKADAVU LANE, VALLAKADAVU LANE, PEROORKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

BY ADV. SRI.VPK.PANICKER RESPONDENTS:

----------------- 1.

M.LEELA BAI, T.C.5/1110, LEELA BHAVAN, PEROORKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 005.

2.

MANJU.S, T.C.5.1110, LEELA BHAVAN, PEROORKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 005.

3.

MOHAMMED HANEEFA, T.C.5/1107, SHAJI MANZIL, AMBALAMUKKU, PEROORKADA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 005.

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

O.P.(C) 887/2015 A P P E N D I X PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXT. P1 :

COPY OF PLAINT IN O.S.1560/06 OF 3RD ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

EXT. P2 :

COPY OF 'B DIARY' IN O.S.1560/2006.

EXT. P3 :

COPY OF I.A.8390/14 IN O.S.1560/06 DTD.22.9.14. EXT. P4 :

COPY OF ORDER DTD.20.10.14 IN I.A.8390/14 IN O.S.1560/06.

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL.

// True Copy // P.A. To Judge.

smp

P.BHAVADASAN, J.

------------------------------------------------- Original Petition (Civil) No.887 OF 2015 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 30h day of March, 2015.

J U D G M E N T

This original petition is directed against the observation made by the court below in Ext.P4 order against a senior member of the Thiruvananthapuram Bar. When the court made certain observations regarding the conduct of the counsel, the counsel filed Ext.P3 to have the observations expunged. A more pitiful situation resulted in Ext.P4 order being passed by the court below.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has produced a copy of the B diary which would indicate that the observations made by the learned Munsiff was unfounded and unjustifiable. Even otherwise the situation does not warrant such expression of indignation. The court had to maintain equanimity and the language soft however objectionable the conduct of the counsel may be.

O.P.(C) No.887/2015 Therefore, the observation made against the petitioner in Ext.P4 stand expunged.

Sd/- P.BHAVADASAN JUDGE smp