IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH DECEMBER 2010 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 OP(C).No. 1165 of 2010(O) ------------------------- OS.215/2010 of MUNSIFF'S COURT, VAIKOM .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- KAMALA, D/O.KARTHIYAYANI, AGED 68 YEARS, RESIDING AT PUTHUPALLICHIRA, KALLARA P.O., KALLARA VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-682 031. BY ADVS. SRI.YASH THOMAS MANNULLY, SRI.V.N.HARIDAS. RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- V.AJAYAKUMAR, S/O.VASUPILLA, RENUKA NIVAS, EDAPALLY SOUTH VILLAGE, ELAMAKKARA P.O., COCHIN-682 026. THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== O.P(C) No.1165 of 2010 ==================================== Dated this the 15th day of December, 2010 J U D G M E N T Defendant in O.S. No.215 of 2010 of the court of learned Munsiff, Vaikom is the petitioner in this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution. It is prayed that learned Munsiff may be directed to set aside judgment and decree in the suit and re-hear the suit giving reasonable time to the parties for obtaining applied certified copies of the depositions and to set aside judgment in O.S. No.215 of 2010 and to follow the legally envisaged procedure in the written statement against counter claim and in the proof affidavit filed by the respondent in the suit. There is also a prayer to direct learned Munsiff to record deposition of respondent that he was not present at Vaikom for signing written statement against the counter statement and proof affidavit. 2. Respondent sued petitioner for specific performance of an agreement dated 01.04.2007 for sale of one acre of land for Rs.75,000/-. Petitioner filed written statement and counter claim. It would appear that issues were framed on 18.09.2010 and the case was posted for trial in the list. Evidence was recorded on 15.10.2010. It is the case of petitioner that she applied for copy of O.P(C) No.1165 of 2010 -: 2 :- the deposition which was not received on time. In the meantime the matter was heard and judgment was pronounced on 04.11.2010. Learned counsel for petitioner contends that proof affidavit filed by the respondent on 15.10.2010 was in O.S. No. 487 of 2010 but the case number was corrected by the ministerial staff of the court below as O.S. No.215 of 2010 without any order from the learned Munsiff. Learned counsel requested that petitioner may be given opportunity to contest the suit. 3. So far as the prayer for re-hearing of the suit is concerned learned Munsiff has disposed of the suit on merit by judgment dated 04.11.2010. Remedy available to the petitioner is to challenge judgment and decree by way of appeal as provided under law. There could be no direction for re-hearing of the suit once the suit is disposed of. 4. So far as the allegation that ministerial staff of the court below has given the case number of the present case in the proof affidavit of respondent is concerned, I find from the photocopy of the proof affidavit filed along with this petition that the case number stated is O.S. No.487 of 2010 but below that, number of the present case is written in ink as O.S. No.215 of O.P(C) No.1165 of 2010 -: 3 :- 2010. Assuming that it was done by the ministerial staff without any order it is open to the petitioner to bring that matter to the learned Munsiff if at all any action is required. Having heard counsel for petitioner and on going through the record I am of the view that reliefs prayed for in this petition cannot be granted. Original Petition is disposed of without prejudice to the right of petitioner to challenge the judgment and decree in O.S. No.215 of 2010 as provided under law. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv