High Court Kerala High Court

The Kottayam Tile Works Ltd vs Joseph Joseph on 31 October, 2006

Kerala High Court
The Kottayam Tile Works Ltd vs Joseph Joseph on 31 October, 2006
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 28558 of 2006(Y)


1. THE KOTTAYAM TILE WORKS LTD.,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. JOSEPH JOSEPH, S/O.JOSEPH,
                       ...       Respondent

2. CHACKO JOSEPH, S/O.JOSEPH,

3. ANNAKUTTY, W/O.LATE VARKEY,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

 Dated :31/10/2006

 O R D E R
                  M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.

                  ------------------------------------------
                  W.P.(C) .NO.28558   OF  2006
                  ------------------------------------------

                  Dated     31st    October   2006

                              JUDGMENT

Petitioner is challenging Ext.P7 order whereunder

trial court directed petitioner to produce document

as sought for by plaintiffs in Ext.P5 application.

Contention of petitioner is that documents sought to

be produced are several and they are not relevant

documents and some of the documents are not available

and in such circumstances the order is to be quashed.

Exercising extra ordinary jurisdiction of this court

under Article 227 of Constitution of India, I do not

find that any interference is called for with regard

to the direction to produce documents. If the

grievance of petitioner is that petitioner is not in

possession of documents, petitioner can file an

affidavit to that effect. If grievance of petitioner

is that, adverse inference will be drawn, adverse

inference can only be drawn if those documents are

material and relevant for deciding the case and are

2

in the custody and control of petitioner. If the

documents are not relevant or necessary or are not

in custody of petitioner, then the court cannot draw

any adverse inference against petitioner. In such

circumstances there is no merit in the petition.

Writ petition is dismissed.

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,
JUDGE.

uj.