IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH DECEMBER 2009 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 35265 of 2009(O) -------------------------- AS.125/2007 of SUB COURT,KOTTARAKKARA .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- SARASWATHY, AGED 58 YEARS, W/O. KUTTAN, RESIDING FROM VILAYIL VEEDU, SIVAN MUKKU, CHITHARA VILLAGE AND NOW AT THATHABAI COLONY, DOOR NO. 61/8/45/3, MALAKAPURAM P.O., VIZHAKAPATTANAM, ANDRAPRADESH. BY ADV. SRI.J.JAYAKUMAR SRI.S.JIJI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SALIM SHA, S/O. RASAVU RAWTHER, AGED 50 YEARS, MUNTHAS MANZIL, SIVANMUKKU, CHITHRA VILLAGE, KOLLAM. 2. UDAYAKUMAR, S/O. PAPUKUTTY, AGED 44 YEARS, VILAYIL VEEDU, SIVANMUKKU, CHITHRA VILLAVE, KOLLAM. 3. USYHA, D/O. NARAYANAN, AGED 55 YEARS, USHA MANDIRAM, CHENANCODU, VADASSERIKONAM P.O., OTTOOR VILLAGE, CHIRAYINKEEZHU TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST. 4. DEVADASAN, S/O. PAPUKUTTY, AGED 52 YEARS, DHAVARANAYIL VEEDU, VANKOLA P.O., MADATHARA. 5. RAJU,S/O. SUKUMARAN, AGED 36 YEARS, PLAVILA VEEDU, SIVANMUKKU, CHITHRA VILLAGE, KOLLAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.35265 OF 2009 (O) ----------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T Challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P4 order passed by the learned District Judge, Kollam declining to receive on the file of the court a civil miscellenous appeal preferred against an order of remand passed by the learned Sub Judge, Kottarakkara in an appeal, namely, A.S.No.125 of 2007. 2. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Previously, the petitioner had preferred a second appeal against the order of remand rendered in A.S.No.125 of 2007 by the learned Sub Judge, Kottarakkara before this Court. That appeal numbered as R.S.A.No.747 of 2009 was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to prefer a first appeal against the order. Ext.P3 is that judgment. Pursuant thereto, without preferring a first appeal against the order of remand before WPC.35265/09 2 this Court, petitioner has preferred a C.M.Appeal before the District Court, Kollam and that was declined to be received and taken on file of the court. There is no illegality or impropriety in Ext.P4 order passed by the learned District Judge. The remedy of the petitioner to challenge the order of remand in the appeal passed by the learned Sub Judge is to prefer a F.A.O before this Court as provided by law. Reserving the right of the petitioner to do so, the writ petition is closed. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE prp