IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH APRIL 2009 / 18TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 12279 of 2009(O) -------------------------- I.A.2666/2009 IN OS.28/2005 of I ADDL.DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. K.V. KURIACHAN, KIZHAKKE CHERUKASTTU, MONAPPILLY, B.K. PURAM P.O., PUTHENCRUZ,. 2. K.V. PAULOSE, S/O. VARGHESER, KEENELIL HOUSE, MEEEMPARA, PUTHENCRUZ. BY ADV. MR. P.GOPALAKRISHNAN (MVA) RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. FR C.K. JOHN COREPIOSCOPA, CHEERAKADAKUNNEL HOUSE, KIZHMURI P.O, RAMAMANGALAM. 2. K.A. GEORGE, KALAPPATTIL HOUSE, BK PURAM, THIRUVANIYOOR, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK. 3. K.V. KURIAKOSE, MEPPADATH HOUSE, THIRUVANIYOOR, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK. 4. RAJAN K. VAGHESER, KALAPPATIL HOUSE, THIRUVANIYOOR, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK. 5. ROJI ABRAHAM, AKAMPALLIL HOUSE, THIRUVANOYOOR P.O. 6. DR. JACOB JOHN, AKAMPALLIL HOUSE, MEEMPARA, AYYIKARANADU SOUTH VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.C. No.12279 OF 2009 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of April, 2009 J U D G M E N T This petition is filed under Article 227of Constitution of India for a writ of mandamus staying the operation of order passed in I.A.2666 of 2009 in O.S.28 of 2005, until certified copy of the order is made available to the petitioner so that he can file an appeal. 2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioners was heard. 3. The argument of the learned counsel appearing for petitioners is that the order in I.A.2666 of 2009 was passed on 6.4.2009, but was not pronounced in the open court and petitioner did not see the order and he was not given the certified copy and therefore he could not file an appeal and till he files an appeal the order is to be suspended. 4. If petitioner is aggrieved by the order, he could have applied for a carbon copy of the order immediately and filed an appeal. The fact that petitioner has a right of appeal against the order, does not mean that the operation of the order is to be WP(C) 12279/09-O 2 suspended till the petitioner gets a certified copy and files an appeal. If the grievance of the petitioner is that he did not get a certified copy, a direction can be issued to the court to issue him a certified copy urgently, if he files an application for urgent copy. Writ petition is disposed of directing Additional District Court, Ernakulam to furnish a certified copy of the order dated 6.4.2009 in I.A.2666 of 2009 in O.S.28 of 2005, if petitioners file an urgent application to issue the certified copy and had filed a copy application, without any delay and in any case within ten days from the date of receipt of the judgment. M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE okb