IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 28582 of 2008(C)
1. MATHEW ABRAHAM, S/O. ABRAHAM,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. JOSE PUTHUKKULATHIL, S/O. JOSEPH,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR
Dated :29/09/2008
O R D E R
V. RAMKUMAR , J.
==========================
W.P.(C) No. 28582 of 2008
==========================
Dated this the 29th day of September, 2008.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner who is the plaintiff in O.S. No. 308 of 2002 on the
file of the Munsiff’s court, Taliparamba which is a suit for realisation of
money, challenges Ext.P4 order dated 08.07.2008 passed by the said
court dismissing the restoration petition filed by the plaintiff.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/plaintiff
would submit that his application was actually one filed under Order 9
Rule 4 C.P.C and that is why the petitioner has not filed an appeal
against Ext.P4 order.
3. Admittedly, the suit was not dismissed either under Rule 2 or
Rule 3 of Order 9 C.P.C so as to justify the filing of a petition under
Order 9 Rule 4 C.P.C. That is why the court below treated the
application filed under Order 9 Rule 4 C.P.C. as one filed under Order 9
Rule 9 C.P.C. The petitioner has got a right of appeal under Order 43
C.P.C. Therefore, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to file
an appeal, this writ petition is dismissed.
Dated this the 29th day of September, 2008.
V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE.
rv