High Court Kerala High Court

P.A.Xavier vs Tresamma on 11 February, 2011

Kerala High Court
P.A.Xavier vs Tresamma on 11 February, 2011
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

OP(C).No. 129 of 2011(O)


1. P.A.XAVIER, S/O.ANTONY, AGED 65 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. TRESAMMA, W/O.JOB, PUTHENPURAKKAL
                       ...       Respondent

2. JOSEPHINE, W/O.LATE MATHEW,

                For Petitioner  :SMT.K.A.ANGEL TREENA

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.N.RAMAKRISHNAN NAIR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

 Dated :11/02/2011

 O R D E R
                K.T.SANKARAN, J.
             ------------------------------
                 O.P(C).No.129 OF 2011
             ------------------------------
        Dated this the 11th day of February, 2011




                        JUDGMENT

The petitioner is the defendant in O.S.No.321 of

2009 on the file of the Court of the Munsiff II, Kochi.

The suit is for partition. The petitioner relies on a

Will executed in his favour by Varghese and Annie,

later brother and sister of the petitioner. Trial of

the suit commenced. The first respondent/plaintiff was

examined as PW1 and the petitioner was examined as DW1.

It is stated that one of the attesting witnesses in

the Will, namely, Cletus is working in Dubai. It is

stated that leave is granted to Cletus for a period

from 30.4.2011 to 30.5.2011 by the employer. He cannot

come to India before 30.4.2011. Pointing out these

circumstances, the petitioner filed I.A.No.34 of 2011

to adjourn the case and to grant sufficient time to the

petitioner to produce the witness. The learned Munsiff

dismissed the application as per the order dated

7.1.2011 and the evidence was closed.

O.P(C).No.129 OF 2011 2

2. The learned counsel appearing for the

respondents submitted that they are not against granting

reasonable time to the petitioner to produce the

attesting witness to the Will. This submission is being

made to avoid any objection that sufficient opportunity

was not granted to the petitioner to prove his case.

3. In view of the submissions made by the counsel

on either side, I am of the view that a direction can be

issued to the court below to examine the attesting

witness to the Will on the re-opening day after summer

holidays. The trial of the suit in other respects may go

on. But the court below shall not dispose of the suit

without affording an opportunity to examine the

attesting witness to the Will as aforesaid.

The Original Petition is disposed of as above.

K.T.SANKARAN,
JUDGE.

cms