IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 22ND JULY 2010 / 31ST ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 20482 of 2010(O) -------------------------- IA NO.1841/2009 IN OS.28/2004 of SUB COURT,ATTINGAL .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- DENSIL D'SOUZA, MILLIE LODGE, THANKASSERI, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.R.RAJESH SRI.K.M.ALEXANDER SMT.A.K.PREETHA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE CHIRAYINKEEZHU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CHIRAYINKEEZHU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-695 304. ADV. SRI.LIJU. M.P SRI.A.SABEER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO.20482/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 A TRUE COPY OF PLAINT IN OS 28/2004 ON THE FILE OF SUB COURT,ATTINGAL EXT.P2 A TRUE COPY OF WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY RESPONDENT/IST DEFENDANT IN OS 28/2004 EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF IA NO.1368/2007 IN OS 28/2004 ON THE FILE OF SUB COURT, ATTINGAL EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF IA NO.1573/2007 IN OS 28/2004 ON THE FILE OF SUB COURT, ATTINGAL EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF IA NO.1707/2009 IN OS 28/2004 ON THE FILE OF SUB COURT, ATTINGAL EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 8.10.2009 IA NO.1707/2009 IN OS 28/2004 ON THE FILE OF SUB COURT, ATTINGAL EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 12.10.2009 GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF IA NO.1777/2009 IN OS 28/2004 ON THE FILE OF SUB COURT, ATTINGAL EXT.P9 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 16.10.2009 IN IA NO.1777/2009 IN OS 28/2004 ON THE FILE OF SUB COURT, ATTINGAL EXT.P10 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 22.10.2009 GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT EXT.P11 TRUE COPY OF IA NO.1841/2009 IN OS 28/2004 ON THE FILE OF SUB COURT, ATTINGAL EXT.P12 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 14.12.2009 IN IA NO.1841/2009 IN OS 28/2004 ON THE FILE OF SUB COURT, ATTINGAL EXT.P13 TRUE COPY OF IA NO.438/2009 IN OS 28/2004 ON THE FILE OF SUB COURT, ATTINGAL EXT.P14 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 1.4.2009 IA NO.438/2009 IN OS 28/2004 ON THE FILE OF SUB COURT, ATTINGAL //TRUE COPY// THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.20482 of 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2010. JUDGMENT Petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.No.28 of 2004 of the court of learned Sub Judge, Attingal. That is a suit for recovery of money based on certain fixed deposits made by the father of petitioner with respondent (defendant No.1 in the suit). According to the petitioner amount due under fixed deposit receipts are to be disbursed to the legal heirs consequent to the death of the father. It is also his case that with the connivance of respondent certain nominations are made in the fixed deposit receipts which do not have the sanction of law . In the course of the suit petitioner learnt that there are several other fixed deposits also made by father with the respondent and wanted the latter to produce all relevant registers in court to facilitate petitioner ascertain from those registers information regarding those fixed deposits. Petitioner preferred Ext.P3, application which was allowed on 18.09.2007. According to the respondent, all relevant registers were produced. But that is disputed by petitioner. Petitioner then filed Ext.P4, application to strike out defence of respondent alleging willful non-compliance with the order of court. Then there was a suggestion from the respondent that petitioner could peruse the registers . Accordingly court below permitted petitioner to peruse the registers at the office of respondent. Time for the said purpose was also fixed. Petitioner's grievance is that respondent did not co- operate in the matter and lame excuses were made either that the Secretary WP(C) No.20482/2010 2 was not available or some other reasons. Respondent ofcourse denies the said allegations and contend that all facilities were provided to the petitioner to verify all relevant registers. Grievance of petitioner is that though he had filed I.A.No.1841 of 2009 before learned Sub Judge seeking a direction to the respondent to produce relevant documents, learned Sub Judge has dismissed that application. 2. Having heard learned counsel on both sides what is required is to give petitioner an opportunity to peruse relevant registers of respondent to ascertain whether apart from fixed deposits referred to in the plaint there are any other fixed deposits standing in the name of petitioner's deceased father. For the said purpose it is not necessary to set aside Ext.P12, order. Instead petitioner can be permitted to peruse the relevant registers at the office of respondent. I make it clear that it will be open to the petitioner to seek assistance of a person of his choice to verify the registers. Resultantly, this Writ Petition is allowed in the following lines: i. Petitioner is permitted to verify the relevant registers of respondent for the period from 01.01.1995 to 31.10.2000 at the office of respondent. WP(C) No.20482/2010 3 ii. Petitioner shall file a statement in the court below detailing the registers (of the said period ) required to be perused. Statement shall be filed in advance giving a copy of the same to the respondent. Respondent shall make available for perusal of petitioner all such registers available with it. In case any register sought for is not available with the respondent, its Secretary shall file affidavit in the court below to that effect. iii. Petitioner is permitted to seek assistance of a person of his choice for perusal of the registers. His name and address shall be furnished in the court below while filing the statement referred to in clause (ii) above. iv. The court below shall give sufficient number of days to the petitioner for perusal of registers and shall fix the days and time for the said purpose after hearing both sides. v. In case Secretary or other person in charge of registers is not available on any day during which time perusal of registers is allowed by the court below, the Secretary or other officer responsible in the matter shall authorise another official of respondent to make available the registers. WP(C) No.20482/2010 4 vi. If parties want any further direction in the matter they can approach the learned Sub Judge for that purpose. vii. In case any such deposits are traced out, the court shall proceed in the matter as provided under law notwithstanding its observation in Ext.P12, order dated 14.12.2009 that the documents sought to be produced are not necessary for the decision of the case. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks