IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN TUESDAY, THE 2ND MARCH 2010 / 11TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 6563 of 2010(O) ------------------------- OS.517/2009 of ADDL.M.C.,KOZHIKODE-I .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------------------- HEERALAL PANANCHAND, AGED 70 YEARS, S/O.PANANCHAND, LAKSHMI CHAND SHAH, TRIKOVIL LANE, JAIN TEMPLE COMPOUND, NAGARAM AMSOM AND DESOM OF KOZHIKODE TALUK. BY ADVS. MR.T.SETHUMADHAVAN, MR.PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH, MR.K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- SAIT ANANDJI KALYANJI JAIN TEMPLE TRUST, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING TRUSTEE, SRI.NARENDRA JAVERLAL SHAH, S/O.JAVERLAL SHAH, NAGARAM AMSOM AND DESOM OF KOZHIKODE TALUK. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/03/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss P. BHAVADASAN, J. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= W.P.(C) No. 6563 of 2010 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 2nd day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT In this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner seeks for a direction to the Munsiff Court-I (A), Kozhikode to issue carbon copy of the order in I.A. No.1007 of 2010 dated 27-2-2010 to the petitioner. It is also prayed for a direction to the Munsiff's Court-I(A), Kozhikode to adjourn the trial of O.S. No.517 of 2009 till the carbon copy of the order is issued. 2. The petitioner is the 1st defendant in O.S. No.517 of 2009 on the file of the Munsiff's Court-I(A), Kozhikode. The suit is filed for eviction of the petitioner from the plaint schedule building owned by the respondent and also for damages. 3. The petitioner claims that he is also a member of the Trust. He entered appearance and filed his objections. The petitioner filed I.A. No.1007 of 2010 to grant leave to serve the interrogatories on the plaintiffs and direct them to answer the interrogatories. That was being repeatedly W.P.(C) No. 6563/10 2 adjourned and finally disposed of on 27-2-2010. The grievance of the petitioner is that though he has applied for a carbon copy of the order, that is not issued so far. In the meanwhile, the suit is listed for trial. According to the petitioner, if the suit is tried without giving an opportunity to him to challenge the order, he will be put to irreparable injury and hardship. 4. In the light of the order proposes to be passed, it is not necessary to issue notice to the respondent. 5. The petitioner wants to challenge the order by which his application was dismissed. He has also applied for a carbon copy of the order. So far it has not been issued. 6. Hence, there will be a direction to the Munsiff's Court-I (A), Kozhikode to issue a carbon copy of the order in I.A. No.1007 of 2010 as early as possible, at any rate within one week from today. Till then, there will be a stay of the trial of the suit. The writ petition is disposed of as above. P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE. mn.