IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 11TH JULY 2008 / 20TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 28049 of 2007(L) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN IA 2191/2007 IN POP.35/2004 of ADDL.SUB COURT, IRINJALAKUDA .................... PETITIONER: ------------ JOY CHALAMANA, S/O. LATE SHRI. KOCHU VARKEY, KUNDOOR P.O., CHALAKKUDY, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.BOSE SRI.VINOD MADHAVAN SMT.NISHA BOSE RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, HEAD OFFICE, VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT GENERAL MANAGER, KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, THRISSUR. 4. SHRI. E.T.ANTO, S/O. THE LATE SHRI. THARIYATH, EDATTUKARA HOUSE, KOTTAMURI, MALA P.O., THRISSUR-680 732. BY ADV. SRI.BABU CHERUKARA FOR R4 SRI.P.JOSHY JOSE FOR R4 SMT.ROSAMMA MATHEW FOR R4 SRI.V.R.ARUN FOR R4 SRI.ANZAR BASHEER FOR R4 SRI.S.RUSSEL FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C) No.28049 of 2007 EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 4.12.1996 IN O.P.6703/1996. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF PLAINT P.O.P.35/2004 BEFORE SUB COURT, IRINJALAKUDA. EXT.P3 TRUE COPYT OF JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.10729 OF 1997 DATED 5.11.2005. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 31.3.2005 BEFORE THE HON'BLE FINANCE MINISTER. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE I.A.NO.2191 OF 2007 IN P.O.P.35/2004. EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION BEFORE THE HON'BLE CHIEF MINISTER DATED 8.9.2007. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.28049 of 2007 ------------------------------- Dated this the 11th July, 2008. J U D G M E N T This petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for a direction to Sub Court, Irinjalakuda, not to proceed with P.O.P.35/2004 pending there, contending that Ext.P6 petition filed by the petitioner before the Government is under consideration. 2. The learned counsel appearing for petitioner was heard. On hearing the learned counsel, I do not find any reason to keep the P.O.P. in abeyance till the disposal of Ext.P6 representation by the Government. Question to be decided in the P.O.P. is whether petitioner is to be permitted to sue as an indigent person or not. For that purpose, order in Ext.P6 is not necessary. If the case of the petitioner is that suit may not be disposed before disposal of Ext.P6 representation, petitioner is at liberty to move a petition before the trial court at that stage. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE nj.