IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 1105 of 2005(F)
1. VETTIYAMVEETTIL BASHEER,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. VELIYAMBATTU MOIDU, S/O. SAITHALAVI,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.P.V.JAYACHANDRAN
For Respondent :SRI.T.KRISHNAN UNNI
The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
Dated :03/08/2007
O R D E R
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J.
-------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 1105 OF 2005
-----------------------------------
Dated this the 3rd day of August, 2007
JUDGMENT
An application under Order IX Rule 13 for setting aside an ex-
parte decree in a suit for specific performance of a contract for sale of
the property was allowed by the learned Subordinate Judge imposing a
condition that a sum of Rs.25,000/- shall be paid/deposited obviously by
way of cost is under challenge in this Writ Petition.
I have heard the submissions of Sri.P.V.Jayachandran, learned
counsel for the petitioner and Sri.T.Krishnan Unni, learned counsel for
the respondent. Having decided to allow the application on
considerations of “justice and fair play”, according to me, the learned
Judge should not have been thus harsh in the matter of imposing cost.
Accordingly, I modify the impugned order to the extent of reducing the
cost from Rs.25,000/- to Rs.5,000/- and clarifying that the sum of
Rs.5,000/- shall be the cost which will not be treated as cost of the suit,
irrespective of the result of the suit. This amount will be paid by the
petitioner to the respondent within three weeks from today, either
directly or through the respondent’s counsel in this court or in the court
below. Once cost is paid and the impugned order becomes operative,
the learned Subordinate Judge will formulate issues on the basis of the
WPC No.1105 of 2005
2
contentions raised in the written statement stated to be filed already,
give top priority to the suit, try and dispose of the same at the earliest by
special listing the same in the earliest available special list for trial.
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE
btt
WPC No.1105 of 2005
3