IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN FRIDAY, THE 9TH APRIL 2010 / 19TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 12690 of 2010(O) --------------------------------------- [OS.NO.158/2006 OF MUNSIFF'S COURT,ATTINGAL] .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- SUSHAMMA, W/O.SURENDRAN, AGED 45, 'SURENDRA NIVAS', MELKADAKKAVOOR, CHIRAYINKIL VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.C.ELDHO. RESPONDENT: ---------------------- JYOTHI, AGED 40, S/O.SAHADEVAN, PANIKKANTEVILAKATHU VEEDU, MELKADAKKAVOOR, CHIRAYINKIL VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/04/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P.BHAVADASAN, J. ------------------------------------- WP(C) No.12690 of 2010-O ------------------------------------- Dated 9th April 2010 Judgment The limited prayer in this Writ Petition is for a direction to the Court below to take up and dispose of Ext.P6 application filed by the petitioner and also to direct the Court below to frame necessary issues in Ext.P1 suit and to give opportunity to the petitioner to pay the balance court fee. 2. The petitioner instituted a suit as OS No.158/06 for recovery of money on the basis of a promissory note. The respondent disputed the signature on the promissory note and filed an application as IA No.1885/06 seeking to send the documents for expert opinion. On 9.1.2007, the Munsiff's Court, Attingal posted the case to 5.2.2007 for framing issues. Thereafter, the case was adjourned to 24.02.2007, 09.03.2007, 23.03.2007, 09.04.2007 and 13.04.2007. Finally, on WPC 12690/10 2 13.04.2007, the Trial Court directed the respondent to appear in person before the Court for furnishing specimen signature for the purpose of sending it for expert opinion. Since she did not comply with the said order, the application filed by her was dismissed. After the dismissal of the application, the case was posted to 11.1.2010. It is submitted that the Trial Court has not so far framed the necessary issues in the suit and that no posting date for payment of balance court fee was fixed. The case was included in the special list on 02.03.2010 for trial. The petitioner filed IA No.687/10 seeking to remove the case from the list. The said IA was dismissed by order dated 02.03.2010. On the very same day, the suit was also dismissed, holding that the petitioner was absent. Copy of the Judgment is produced as Ext.P5. Immediately, the petitioner filed an application for restoration of the suit. Copy of the said application is produced as Ext.P6. The petitioner submits, so far, no orders have been passed on his application. WPC 12690/10 3 3. The petitioner points out that the Trial Court has not so far framed any issues in Ext.P1 suit and also that as per S.4A of the Kerala Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act, only 1/10th court fee needs to be paid at the time of institution of the suit and the balance court fee is to be paid within 15 days from the date of framing issues. The petitioner submits, though this procedural irregularity was pointed out on several occasions, the Court did not do anything in the matter. The petitioner submits that Ext.P6 application pending before the Court below may be directed to be disposed of. She also prays for a direction to the Court below to frame necessary issues in the suit and permit her to pay the balance court fee. 4. In the nature of the order that is proposed to be passed in this Petition, it is felt that notice is unnecessary to the respondent. 5. The petitioner has filed an application for restoration of the suit and it has to be dealt with in accordance with law. If the issues have not been so far WPC 12690/10 4 framed, the petitioner cannot be called upon to pay the balance court fee in terms of the provisions of the Kerala Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act. 6. In the result, there will be a direction to the Court below to take up Ext.P6 application filed by the petitioner and dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of re- opening of the Court after the mid-summer vacation and also to provide the petitioner ample opportunity to pay the balance court fee, after raising necessary issues in the suit if Ext.P6 is allowed. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE sta WPC 12690/10 5 WPC 12690/10 6