V.C.Ashraff vs Mangool Chakkara Vinayakrishnan on 29 June, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 14621 of 2009(O)


1. V.C.ASHRAFF, S/O. KHADER, AGED 38 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. B.SAJITHA, W/O. ASHRAFF, AGED 38 YEARS,

                        Vs



1. MANGOOL CHAKKARA VINAYAKRISHNAN,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY CHIEF

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.RAMKUMAR NAMBIAR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN

 Dated :29/06/2009

 O R D E R
                   S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J.
                  -----------------------------------
                  W.P.(C).No.14621 of 2009 - O
                   ---------------------------------
               Dated this the 29th day of June, 2009

                          J U D G M E N T

Petitioners are the decree holders in O.S.No.18/2006 on the

file of the Additional Sub Court, Thalassery. Suit was one for

money instituted by the petitioners through their power of

attorney. Suit was decreed in favour of the petitioners. First

respondent/judgment debtor in satisfaction of the decree

deposited the decree amount before the court. Cheque

application was moved by the petitioners through their power of

attorney. It was disallowed by the court. Challenging the

correctness of that this writ petition is filed invoking the

supervisory jurisdiction vested with this Court under Article 227

of the Constitution of India.

2. A report was called from the learned Additional Sub

Judge, Thalassery to find out why the cheque application was

disallowed. It was reported that the power of attorney was not

produced with the cheque application and there was nothing on

record to prove that the person who moved the application was

W.P.(C).No.146214 of 2009 – O

2

duly authorized to collect the decree amount deposited in court.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that without

prejudice to the right of the petitioners to move afresh a cheque

application through the power of attorney holder on production of

that power of attorney, the petition may be disposed of.

Reserving the right of the petitioners to move a fresh

cheque application on production of a power of attorney as

requested by the learned counsel for the petitioners, this writ

petition is closed. If any cheque application is moved by the

petitioners producing the power of attorney, the learned Sub

Judge shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, as

expeditiously as possible.

S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN,
JUDGE.

bkn/-