IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH MAY 2011 / 4TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 6659 of 2010(O) ------------------------- OS.184/2009 of MUNSIFF COURT, KANJIRAPPALLY .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- JOLLY MATHEW @ ALIAYAMMA MATHEW AMBATTU NEELIVILAYIL, VANDAMPATHAL, ASAMBANI BHAGOM, ERUMELY NORTH VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.LIJI.J.VADAKEDOM RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SUNNY,PUTHUPPARAMBIL, VANDAMPATHAL, ASAMBANI BHAGOM,ERUMELY NORTH VILLAGE. 2. ELSY PUTHUPPARAMBIL VANDAMPATHAL,ASAMBANI BHAGOM, ERUMELY NORTH VILLAGE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC 6659/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.NO.184/2009 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT, KANJIRAPPALLY. EXT.P2: COPY OF WRITTEN STATEMENT. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT ALONG THE DEPOSITION OF THE PLAINTIFF (PW1) IN O.S.NO.184/2009 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT, KANJIRAPPALLY. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 30.8.2008 TOGETHER WITH THE ENDORSEMENT MADE BY THE COURT REGARDING THE PENALTY. EXT.P4(a) : COPY OF THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 27.7.2009 MADE BY THE MUNSIFF COURT, KANJIRAPPALLY OVER THE DOCKET PRODUCING EXHIBIT P4 AGREEMENT IN O.S.NO.184/2009. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE 'B' DAIRY IN OS NO.184/2009 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT, KANJIRAPPALLY. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE K.T.SANKARAN, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.6659 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of May, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.No.184 of 2009 on the file of the court of the Munsiff of Kanjirappally. The case was listed for trial. The petitioner filed proof affidavit. Along with the proof affidavit, the petitioner produced two documents indicating the same as Exhibits A1 and A2. It is submitted that Exhibit A1 is really an agreement for sale though it is styled as an assignment deed. Copy of that document is produced as Exhibit P4 in this Original Petition. It is endorsed on Exhibit P4 thus: "Stamp duty deficit ` 12,550/- and penalty ` 1,25,500/- due on this document." 2. The petitioner submits that though he produced two documents, the B diary (Exhibit P5) shows that only Exhibit A1 was marked. The counsel submits that the W.P.(C) No.6659/2010 2 document dated 30.8.2008 (Exhibit P4) was not marked by the court below in evidence and no reasons are stated for not marking the document. The reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition are the following : "a. issue a direction, to call for the records leading to the passing of Exhibit P4(a) and to quash the same. b. issue a direction, directing the Munsifff Court, Kanjirappally to receive Exhibit P4 agreement in evidence in O.S.No.184 of 2009 for the purpose of proving the plaintiff's case of right of way. or in the alternative c. Direct the Munsiff Court, Kanjirappally to pass an order regarding admissibility of Exhibit P4 agreement in O.S.No.184 of 2009. d. grant such other reliefs which this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice." W.P.(C) No.6659/2010 3 3. Reliefs 'a' & 'b' cannot be granted at all in this Writ Petition. It is for the trial court to decide whether a document should be admitted in evidence or not. If a decision is taken by the trial court, the aggrieved party would be entitled to challenge the same in accordance with law. It would appear that no order was passed by the court below. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I think relief No.'c' can be granted in the case. The court below shall pass a speaking order if the document dated 30.8.2008 is not received in evidence. Both the parties would be entitled to put forward their contentions before the court below. No further orders are required in the Writ Petition. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl