IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 21100 of 2010(O)
1. C.L.KURIAN AND BROTHERS", RICE BAZAR,
... Petitioner
2. C.I.CICILY, AGED 50 YEARS,
3. SIJO GEORGE, S/O. GEORGE, AGED 35 YEARS
Vs
1. CICILY KURIAN, AGED 66 YEARS,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.P.HARIDAS
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH
Dated :12/07/2010
O R D E R
THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J.
-------------------------------------
WP (C) No. 21100 of 2010
-------------------------------------
Dated this the 12th day of July, 2010
J U D G M E N T
………………………
Petitioners are defendants in O.S No. 685/06 of
the Court of learned Sub Judge, Thrissur.
Respondent/plaintiff filed that suit for dissolution of
partnership and settlement of accounts. According to the
petitioners official Receiver was appointed ex-parte as
Receiver and he took possession of the stock in trade of
partnership which is dealing in Ayurvedic raw materials
and which included perishable articles well. Petitioners
were set ex-parte on 05.04.2010. Petitioners filed
application to set aside the ex-parte order. Petitioners
approached this Court in WP(C) No.17392/10 for early
disposal of the application and this Court disposed that
writ petition vide judgment dated 04.06.2010, directing
learned Sub Judge to dispose of Exhibit P4 (Exhibit P7 in
that writ petition) as expeditiously as possible. Learned
2
WP (C) No. 21100 of 2010
counsel states that a copy of order was handed over to
the Chief Ministerial Officer on the succeeding day but,
Exhibit P4 application was not disposed expeditiously.
Accordingly, this writ petition is filed, seeking a direction
to the learned Sub Judge to issue a copy of order on IA
No. 3880/06 within a time limit to be prescribed by this
Court and, to restore possession of business to the
petitioners and permit them to run the business.
2. Since, it was reported that judgment of this Court
in WP(C) 17392/10 was not complied, I called for a report
from learned Sub Judge. Learned Sub Judge reported
that the order in WP(C) 17389/10 was not communicated
to him and that the counsel for the party also did not
make any submission about the said order. On
07.07.2010 a telephonic message was received from this
Court and immediately thereon Exhibit P4 application was
advanced suo motu to that day and posted to 8.7.10 for
hearing. It is also reported that after hearing counsel on
both sides Exhibit P4 application was disposed of, on the
3
WP (C) No. 21100 of 2010
same day at 3 p.m. Learned counsel for the petitioner
states that Exhibit P4 application to set aside ex-parte
order is dismissed by the learned Sub Judge and today
the case is posted for recording ex-parte evidence of
respondents. He requests that a direction may be given
to the learned Sub Judge to issue carbon copy of order on
Exhibit P4, application and I.A.No.3880/06 immediately.
3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of
the case and in order to give petitioner opportunity to
challenge the impugned orders passed against him, it is
necessary that the recording of ex-parte evidence of
respondent is kept in abeyance for sometime. Petitioner
shall also be issued a carbon copy of the orders on Exhibit
P4 application and IA 3880/06 at the earliest.
Resultantly this writ petition is disposed of in the
following line:-
1. Learned Sub Judge is directed to issue
certified/carbon copy of orders on Exhibit P4,
application and IA 3880/06 in OS No.685/06 at
4
WP (C) No. 21100 of 2010the earliest, at any rate within a week from the
date of receipt of a copy of this judgment to the
petitioner in case such copy has been applied for
as provided under law.
2. Learned Sub Judge is directed to keep in
abeyance recording of ex-parte evidence in the
suit for a period of two weeks from this day.
3. The Registry shall communicate the gist of
this Judgment to the learned Sub Judge
forthwith.
THOMAS P. JOSEPH,
JUDGE.
rkc