IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH JANUARY 2008 / 26TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 1995 of 2008(K) ------------------------- OS.264/2002 of ADDL.SUB COURT, PALAKKAD .................... PETITIONER: ------------ SREEKUTTAN, S/O.RAJAPPAN, PARAMBATHERI KATTATHURUTHU MURI, MOOTHAKUNNAM, PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.R.VINOD SMT.M.S.LETHA RESPONDENTS: ------------- VELLINGIRI, S/O.MARAPPA KOUNDER, MOONGILMADA KALAM, VANNAMADA, GOPALAPURAM, KOZHIPATHY, CHITTOR. BY SHRI.RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ------------------------- WP(C) No. 1995 of 2008 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 16th day of January, 2008 J U D G M E N T This writ petition is filed against the order of the Sub Court, Palakkad in I.A. No.54/08 in O.A.No.264/02. The writ petitioner is the plaintiff in the suit for specific performance of a contract. The suit was listed on 25/07/2008 and it was adjourned to 04/01/2008. It is the case of the petitioner that on 25/07/2007, while the plaintiff and his witnesses were returning from the court, the defendant and his men threatened them saying that they will kill them, in case they appear before the Court and give oral evidence. Therefore, an application is now filed for examination of the plaintiff and the witnesses through a Commission. That has been totally denied by the respondent on their side. The court below also do not find in favour of the plaintiff in the suit for the following reasons. (1) There is absolutely no complaint between 25/07/2007 and till the date of filing of the application for issuance of a Commission. (2) No police case has been preferred against the alleged threat by the other side. So that the court found these are not genuine grounds, and therefore dismissed the application. I also feel that the logic behind the decision of the learned WP(C) No. 1995/2008 -2- subordinate judge cannot be found fault with. It is true, that when a matter is filed there will be anxiety for both the sides, but that anxiety should be to conduct the litigation properly and not to fight each other physically. The learned counsel for the respondent reiterated before me that nothing of that type had happened and it will never happen. Therefore, I do not find any ground to interfere with the decision of the Court below but I request the learned counsel for the respondent to direct the defendant in the suit not to give any room of doubt or apprehension in the mind of the plaintiff of a physical or body attack on him. If a situation arises and the court is convinced that the plaintiff needs help of the court, certainly the court can extend its hands to help the plaintiff for properly conducting the case before the court. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. (M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE) jg