High Court of KeralaOP(C)/2118/2014disposed of

Jose Philip v. Muhammed Ali

2015-01-08Honourable Mr.Justice P.Bhavadasan4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN THURSDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY 2015/18TH POUSHA, 1936 OP(C).No. 2118 of 2014 (O) -------------------------------------- OS 878/2010 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,KOZHIKODE --------------------- PETITIONER(S):

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

1. JOSE PHILIP, AGED 63 YEARS S/O.K.M PHILIP, KANAYAMPLACKAL, 9 JAYANTHI NAGAR COLONY KALATHILKUNNU AMSOM, DESOM, KOZHIKODE.

2. MARGRET JACOB, W/O.JOSE PHILIP, KANAYAMPLACKAL 9 JAYANTHI NAGAR COLONY, KALATHILKUNNU AMSOM, DESOM KOZHIKODE.

BY ADVS.SRI.GEORGE KARITHANAM VARGHESE SRI.JOSE KURIAKOSE (VILANGATTIL) RESPONDENT(S):

------------------------- MUHAMMED ALI, AGED 54 YEARS S/O.K KOYATTI HAJI, MUKATHALI HOUSE, NANMANDA AMSOM KULATHOOR DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK PIN 673 613. BY ADVS. SRI.K.M.FIROZ SMT.M.SHAJNA SRI.S.KANNAN THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08-01-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

OP(C).No. 2118 of 2014 (O) -------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S 878/2010 OF THE SUB COURT,KOZHIKODE DTD 03-11-2010 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT DTD 10-02-2013 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER CLAIM DTD 23/8/13 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER STATEMENT DTD 23-09-2013 EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF I.A 2872/2014 IN O.S NO 878/2010 DTD 15-07-2014 EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF COUNTER STATEMENT IN I.A 2872/2014 IN O.S NO 878/2010 DTD 13-08-2014 EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF I.A 3389/2014 IN O.S NO 878/2010 DTD 26-08-2014 RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL.

/ TRUE COPY / P.S. TO JUDGE PJ

P.BHAVADASAN, J.

------------------------------------------------- Original Petition (Civil) No.2118 OF 2014 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of January, 2015.

J U D G M E N T

The limited relief that needs to be granted in this petition is regarding Ext.P5 restoration application said to have been filed by the petitioners which was dismissed by the court below on the ground that the petitioners had not paid the cost as ordered by the court below.

2. There is lot of controversy regarding the order passed by the court below. The petitioners have a grievance that no such order directing payment of Rs.3,000/- as cost is seen mentioned in the A diary and they were not aware of that order. It is pointed out that the petitioners have sought for adjournment of the case for payment of cost as ordered by the court below and on that day, the restoration application was dismissed.

3. This Court had called for the records and it has been received. In order to shorten the litigation, it is appropriate that Ext.P5 be allowed.

O.P.(C) No.2118/2014 In the result, Ext.P5 stands allowed on condition that the petitioners pay Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three thousand only) to the respondent as ordered by the court below within a period of two weeks from today.

This original petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- P.BHAVADASAN JUDGE smp