IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 25TH JUNE 2010 / 4TH ASHADHA 1932 AS.No. 142 of 2002(E) -------------------------------- OS.1386/1994 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT(S): DEFENDANT: ------------------------ K.V.RAO, M/S. SPLENDOURS 3/6/454, HIMAYAT NAGAR, HYDERABAD-500 025. BY ADV. SRI.G.SASIDHARAN CHEMPAZHANTHIYIL SRI.S.VISHNU SRI.MANOJ RAMASWAMY SMT.SANJANA R.NAIR RESPONDENT(S): PLAINTIFF: ------------------------- P.V.OOMEN, AGED 55 YEARS, MANAGING DIRECTOR, INDO GULF PRINTERS(PVT) LTD., NEAR M.G.COLLEGE, KESAVADASAPURAM, PATTOM P.O. THIS APPEAL SUITS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/06/2010 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON CMP. NO.1292/2002 IN AS. NO.142/2002 DISMISSED 25/06/2010 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... A.S.NO.142 OF 2002 ............................................. Dated this the 25th day of June, 2010. J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the judgment and decree of the Second Additional Subordinate Judge's Court, Trivandrum in O.S.No.1386/1994. The suit is one for realisation of amount on account of dishonouring of a cheque. It is the case of the plaintiff that the defendant had issued a cheque in favour of the plaintiff for Rs.25,000/= which when presented for encashment, returned with the endorsement 'insufficiency of funds' and in spite of notice the amount is not paid, hence the suit. 2. The defendant had denied the same and he had filed a counter claim. Though the plaintiff's evidence was over, at the stage of the defence evidence, he absented himself from the court and therefore the court setting him ex parte, granted a decree in favour of the plaintiff and dismissed the counter claim. It is against the granting of a decree in the suit, the defendant has come up in appeal. 3. After hearing the learned counsel for the appellant, I am inclined to grant an opportunity to the defendant to : 2 : A.S.NO.142 OF 2002 adduce evidence and substantiate his contention with respect to the suit claim. The court below should have granted him an opportunity and not doing of the same, had resulted injustice to him and therefore, the judgment and decree of the trial court are set aside and the mater is remitted back to the trial court with a direction to permit both the parties to adduce further evidence in support of their respective contentions and let the matter be disposed of in accordance with law thereafter. Parties are directed to appear before the trial court on 27.7.2010. Disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. cl : 3 : A.S.NO.142 OF 2002 M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... A.S.NO.142 OF 2002 ............................................. 25th day of June, 2010. J U D G M E N T