IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 22ND OCTOBER 2009 / 30TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 29809 of 2009(O) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 09/07/2009 IN IA.706/2008 IN AS.43/2007 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,THRISSUR O.S.NO.100/02 OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, TRICHUR. .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. THOMAS, S/O. PUTHOOR ANTONY, VELLARKAD POST, ERUMAPETTY, THALLAPILLY TALUK, TRICHUR-680 584. 2. SHEELA THOMAS, VELLARKAD POST, ERUMAPETTY, THALLAPILLY TALUK, TRICHUR-680 584. BY ADV. SRI.A.K.CHINNAN SMT.SUSAL A. CHINNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. JOHN, S/O. PUTHOOR ANTONY, PUTHOOR HOUSE, VELLARKAD POST, ERUMAPETTY, THALLAPILLY TALUK, TRICHUR-680 584. 2. LIJI JOHN, W/O. JOHN, PUTHOOR HOUSE, VELLARKAD POST, ERUMAPETTY, THALLAPILLY TALUK, TRICHUR-680 584. 3. ANTONY, S/O. OUSEPH, PUTHOOR HOUSE, VELLARKAD POST, ERUMAPETTY, THALLAPILLY TALUK, TRICHUR-680 584. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.29809 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 22nd October, 2009 JUDGMENT The Writ Petition is filed seeking mainly the following reliefs: 1. To issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, direction or order to quash Exhibit P7 order dated 9.7.2009 in I.A.706/2008 in A.S.No.43/2007 of Additional Sub Court, Trichur. 2. To issue a writ of prohibition or other appropriate writ, direction or order commanding the court below to stay all further proceedings in A.S.No.43/2007 pursuant to the order dated 9.7.2009 in I.A.706/2008 of Additional Sub Court, Trichur. 2. Petitioners are the defendants in O.S.No.100 of 2002 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Wadakkencherry. Suit is for permanent prohibitory injunction, and the respondents are the plaintiffs. Suit was decreed in favour of the respondents. Against the decision rendered by the trial court, these petitioners have preferred an appeal, which on transmission to the Sub Court, Trichur, from the District Court, Trichur, and numbered as A.S.No.43 of 2007, is pending for hearing and disposal. Petitioners have moved an application for sending over W.P.C.No.29809/09 - 2 - some documents to a forensic expert disputing an agreement for sale. The learned Sub Judge, after hearing both sides, dismissed that application vide P7 order. Propriety and correctness of that order is challenged in the Writ Petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 3. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. Having regard to the submissions made and taking note of the facts and circumstances presented with reference to P7 order and also other exhibits tendered in the writ petition, I find no notice to the respondents is necessary, and hence, it is dispensed with. The appellate court has declined the request of the petitioners to send over the disputed document, to a forensic expert, which, according to the petitioners, was not a genuine document, as highly belated. Whether the document is genuine or not is a matter which is to be considered with reference to other pieces of evidence let in the case. If the petitioners/defendants had not been provided sufficient opportunity in the trial court for sending over the document to have a scientific examination, definitely, they can canvass that ground in the appeal. On the facts presented, I do not find any impropriety or illegality in the order passed by the learned Sub Judge holding that the request made by the petitioners for sending over the document W.P.C.No.29809/09 - 3 - cannot be entertained. Writ Petition lacks merit, and it is dismissed. srd S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE