IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
AS.No. 87 of 1999()
1. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI SATHEESH LAL
... Petitioner
Vs
1. LEELA SATHISH
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.BABU CHERUKARA
For Respondent :SRI.K.GEORGE VARGHESE KANNANTHANAM
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN
Dated :11/06/2010
O R D E R
M.N. KRISHNAN, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
A.S. NO. 87 OF 1999
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 11th day of June, 2010.
J U D G M E N T
This appeal is preferred against the
judgment and decree passed by the Subordinate
Judge, Pathanamthitta in O.S.238/93. The suit
is one for realisation of the amount, i.e.
Rs.32,000/- given as the share as well as value
of 17 sovereigns of gold alleged to be taken by
the husband given to the wife at the time of
marriage. On the other hand, the defendant had
denied the receipt of any amount and had also
denied about the taking of any ornament by him
for his sister’s marriage.
2. I find an extremely difficult situation
in this case because the 2nd defendant who is the
husband has not been cross examined at all in
this case. An application was filed for
A.S. No. 87 OF 1999
-2-
permitting him to be cross-examined and it was
allowed. But it appears that he was present on
the next day and he was not cross-examined.
Thereafter again it is recorded that he was not
present and no steps were taken. It was the
duty of the witness to come before the Court to
face the cross-examination. I am not blaming
either the plaintiff nor the defendant for the
reason nothing is clear from the trial Court
records what had transpired in that Court and
therefore it is desirable that DW1 is cross-
examined so that the Court will have some idea
about the whole thing. I am not expressing
anything on the merits of this case and I set
aside the judgment and decree of the Court below
and remit the case back to the trial court for
fresh consideration after permitting the parties
to adduce evidence in support of their
respective contentions.
A.S. No. 87 OF 1999
-3-
It is made clear that the 2nd defendant shall
make himself available for cross-examination on
the date fixed by the Court and thereafter if
the parties want any other evidence that may
also be permitted. Thereafter the Court below is
directed to dispose of the matter in accordance
with law. Parties are directed to appear before
the Court below on 22.7.2010. Being a very old
matter the trial court shall see that an
expeditious disposal is done.
M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE.
ul/-
A.S. No. 87 OF 1999
-4-
M.N. KRISHNAN, J.
= = = = = = = = = =
A.S. No. 87 OF 1999
= = = = = = = = = = =
J U D G M E N T
11th June, 2010.