IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS THURSDAY, THE 24TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 2ND ASWINA 1931 FAO.No. 4 of 2009 -------------------------------- I.A.NO.818/2008 IN OS.74/2007 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,ALAPPUZHA .................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS/DEFENDANTS: -------------------------------------------------------------- 1. LENIN JACOB, S/O.JACOB, ARACKAL HOUSE, POLLETHAI PO., ALAPPUZHA. 2. JOSEPH.A.G., S/O.GREGORY, ARACKAL HOUSE, POLLETHAI PO., ALLAPPUZHA 3. JACOB A.G., S/O.GREGORY, ARACKAL HOUSE POLLETHAI PO., ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.B.PRAMOD SRI.GEORGE MATHEWS RESPONDENT(S)/CR. PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF: ----------------------------------------------------------------- STATE BANK OF INDIA, AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT BRANCH, ALAPPUZHA REP. BY ITS ASST.GEN.MANAGER, ADB, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH & M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- F.A.O. NO. 4 OF 2009 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th September, 2009 JUDGMENT K.M. Joseph, J. Appellants call in question the order passed in I.A.No.818/08 in O.S. No.74/2007, which is an I.A. filed seeking to set aside the ex parte decree passed against the appellants. The Suit is filed in the year 2007. According to the appellants, the first appellant was affected by viral fever from 10.2.2008 and he was under the treatment of Dr. Sudhakar Ravu attached to the S.V. Hospital, Cherthala. According to the first appellant, he could not meet the Advocate, but he telephoned him on 13.2.2008. It is further stated that appellants 2 and 3 are fishermen and they were in deep sea fishing. It was in such circumstances that they could not appear before the court below. The Court did not accept the case of the appellants. It was, inter alia, found that the Doctor was not examined to disprove F.A.O.4/09 2 the assertion. 2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Bank. No doubt, in these matters, a liberal view has to be taken. We see some merit in the contention of the appellants that the appellants should be allowed to contest the matter. So, taking a lenient view, we allow the Appeal and set aside the impugned order and the Application will stand allowed on condition that the appellants shall pay costs of Rs.3,000/= (Rupees Three Thousand) to the respondent within a period of one month from today and produce the Memo in this Court, also within the same period. Sd/= K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/= M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge