Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

AJAYAKUMAR. K., S/O. KANNAN versus KANAKALATHA @ UMAIBA

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


AJAYAKUMAR. K., S/O. KANNAN v. KANAKALATHA @ UMAIBA - WP(C) No. 37717 of 2004(M) [2007] RD-KL 8706 (28 May 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 37717 of 2004(M)

1. AJAYAKUMAR. K., S/O. KANNAN,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. KANAKALATHA @ UMAIBA,
... Respondent

2. K. GOWRI, D/O. BHASKARAN,

3. K. INDIRA, D/O. KANNA,

4. K. LALITHA, W/O. HARIDASAN,

5. K. VIMALA, W/O. REMASHAN,

6. K. BHARATHI, W/O. MANDEN PURUSHOTHAMAN,

For Petitioner :SRI.K.C.SANTHOSHKUMAR

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE

Dated :28/05/2007

O R D E R

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J.

W.P.(C) No. 37717 OF 2004

Dated this the 28th day of May, 2007



JUDGMENT

Ext.P4 order of the Munsiff, Thalassery by which Ext.P1 commissioner's report submitted by a commissioner who was appointed in final decree proceedings has been set aside is under challenge by the 6th defendant. The 6th defendant had filed very serious objections to the application submitted by the 1st respondent who was the 5th defendant in the suit. It is a cryptic order which has been passed by the learned Munsiff. But a reading of the said order will show that the circumstance that no counter evidence was adduced by the petitioner weighed with the learned Munsiff for issuing the direction in the present fashion. Even though the 1st respondent has been served with notice, she has not entered appearance before this Court. Having regard to the submissions of Sri.K.C.Santhoshkumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the view that at least one opportunity ought to be afforded to the petitioner to adduce evidence in IA No.1700 of 2003. But I am inclined to grant the same only on condition. Ext.P4 will stand set aside on condition that the petitioner pays to the 1st respondent either directly or through the counsel appearing for her in the court below within two weeks of his receiving WPC No.37717/2004 2 copy of this judgment, a sum of Rs.750/-. If payment is not made as above, Ext.P4 will stand confirmed and the Writ Petition will stand dismissed. If payment is made as directed above, the learned Munsiff will re-post IA No.1700 of 2003 for further enquiry and will permit at least one opportunity to the petitioner for adducing whatever counter evidence at his command.

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE

btt WPC No.37717/2004 3


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.