IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 20TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 29TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No.30103 of 2008 (H) ---------------------------------- OS.359/1983 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, PALAKKAD .................... PETITIONER: --------------- ARULMOZHIVARMAN, S/O.KANDASWAMY KOUNDER, NOW RESIDING AT COIMBATORE TOWN, COIMBATORE DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU. BY ADV. SRI.D.KRISHNA PRASAD SRI.D.NARENDRANATH SRI.M.HARISHARMA SRI.T.P.ELDHOSE SMT.O.K.SANTHA RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. SAKTHIVEL, CHEELAKKADU, MUTHALAMADA AMSOM, CHITTUR TALUK. 2. JANAKI, CHEELAKKADU, MUTHALAMADA AMSOM, CHITTUR TALUK. 3. THANKAVELU, CHEELAKKADU, MUTHALAMADA AMSOM, CHITTUR TALUK. 4. MAYILATHAL, CHEELAKKADU, MUTHALAMADA AMSOM, CHITTUR TALUK. 5. SUNDARAMBAL, CHEELAKKADU, MUTHALAMADA AMSOM, CHITTUR TALUK. 6. RANGARAJ, CHEELAKKADU, MUTHALAMADA AMSOM, CHITTUR TALUK. WP(C).No.30103 of 2008 (H) -2- 7. PUSHPA, CHEELAKKADU, MUTHALAMADA AMSOM, CHITTUR TALUK. 8. DEVENDRAN, VENGIRIMALAI P.O. COIMBATORE DISTRICT. (The second respondent Janaki herein is the widow of Pazhaniyappa Kounder the original 1st respondent and others are their children) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.P.BALACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------------------------ W. P. C. No.30103 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 20th day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT The prayer of the petitioner/plaintiff in this Writ Petition is for a direction being given to the Sub Court, Palakkad where O.S.359/1983 is pending to dispose of the said suit expeditiously and within a specific time frame. 2. It has come out from the statement of facts in the Writ Petition itself that certain records in the case are missing when the case records are returned back to the court by the Land Tribunal and District Collector, Palakkad has informed the Sub Judge that the records are not available in the concerned Land Tribunal. Consequently, this Court has obtained reports from the concerned Sub Judge and after several correspondence, the Sub Judge has finally reported that the W. P. C. No.30103 of 2008 -2- reconstruction of the missing document is impossible as the records reported to be missing were all unregistered documents and the counsel for the defendant reported orally that the defendants are residing at different places in Tamilnadu and though informed they did not turn up and however, that the defendants' counsel opined that there is no chance to produce copies of the documents as his clients do not have the same in their possession. 3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff that the missing records are not really relevant for adjudicating the matter particularly in the context of the earlier concluded order of remand made by the appellate court and that the plea of tenancy raised by the defendants is also totally without any truth or bona W. P. C. No.30103 of 2008 -3- fides and it was intended to delay and protract the proceedings and he has taken that contention also as ground 'B' in this Writ Petition. However, those are matters which the appropriate court has to consider. 4. It is also submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the respondents had filed W.P.C.16486/08 wherein this Court has passed an order without hearing him and even without notice to him that the suit shall not be disposed of without getting down the documents which are now reported to be missing. When such a direction is there from Writ Petition No.16486/08 it would be highly improper for this Court to give a direction contrary thereto to dispose of the case within a time frame without those documents. 5. In the result, I dismiss this Writ Petition without prejudice to the petitioner W. P. C. No.30103 of 2008 -4- moving in W.P.C.16486/08 to get appropriate directions under the strange and peculiar circumstances available in the instant case. K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JUDGE kns/-