IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH JANUARY 2008 / 19TH POUSHA 1929 OP.No. 34856 of 2002(Y) ----------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. C.R.UDAYAPRAKASH, S/O.CHELLAPPAN PILLAI, AGED 46 YEARS, PRAKASH MANDIRAM, MYLAKKADU, ADHICHANELLOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM. 2. RADHAMONI AMMA, W/O.C.R.UDAYAPRAKASH, PRAKASH MANDIRAM, MYLAKKADU, ADHICHANELLOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SURESH KUMAR RESPONDENTS: ---------------- 1. G.GOPIMOHAN, S/O.P.K.GOPALAN PILLAI, AGED 56 YEARS, RESIDING AT GREEN HILL, MUNDAKKAL WEST, MUNDAKKAL, KOLLAM. 2. G.DILEEPMOHAN, S/O.P.K.GOPALAN PILLAI, AGED 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT PRASANTH, MUNDAKKAL WEST, MUNDAKKAL, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL) THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/01/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP No. 34586 OF 2002 ORDER ON CMP NO. 58956 OF 2002 & IA NO.11218 OF 2003 IN OP NO. 34856 OF 2002 DISMISSED 09.01.2008 SD/- PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED IN OS NO.208/01 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL SUB JUDGE, KOLLAM DT.18.07.02. EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF IA NO.1719/02 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS IN OS NO.208/01 ON THE FILE OF THE SUB COURT, KOLLAM ALONG WITH THE AFFIDAVIT FILED IN SUPPORT OF THE SAME DT.31.07.02. /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J. ------------------------------- O.P. No. 34856 OF 2002 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT The question which arises in this Writ Petition is whether the Court has power to receive a written statement which has been filed after the period of 90 days allowed by the Code of Civil Procedure. The issue is covered in favour of petitioner by various decisions such as Kailash v. Nanhu [2005 (2) KLT 623] and also the judgment in Elamkunnapuzha Panchayat v. Dinaker [2005(3) KLT 543]. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in this particular case the written statement, as a matter of fact, was filed within the time allowed by the court. Under these circumstances, I quash Ext.P1 and allow Ext.P2 IA. The written statement filed by the petitioner will be received on file. The learned Subordinate Judge will formulate issues in the case on the basis of the contentions raised therein and the suit will be disposed of in accordance with law. Since the suit is of the year 2001, the learned Subordinate Judge will expedite the trial. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE btt WPC 2