IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2008 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 27211 of 2008(M) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 25/08/2008 IN IA 1883/08 IN OS.154/2002 of MUNSIFF COURT,KAYAMKULAM .................... PETITIONER: -------------------- P.C. SUKUMARA PILLAI, SREEVALSAM VEETIL, CHERAVALLMURI, KAYAMKULAM VILLAGE, (PRESIDENT N.S.S KARAYOGAM, KAYAMKULAM CHARAVALLY NORTH) BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL) SRI.A.R.DILEEP SMT.SURYA SASI RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THE SECRETARY, THIRUVITHAMCORE DEVASWOM BOARD. 2. ASSISTANT DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, KARUNAGAPPALLY. 3. SUB GROUP OFFICE, PUTHIYADOM, KAYAMKULAM. ADV. SRI.K.N.VENUGOPALA PANICKER, SC, TDB FOR R1-2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.P. BALACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P(C) No.27211 OF 2008-M ------------------------------- Dated this the 1st December, 2008. JUDGMENT Heard counsel for the petitioner. Counsel for the respondent is absent. 2. Counsel for the petitioner has produced a copy of order on the proceedings paper dated 2.8.2008. It is seen recorded that both sides are present, that the plaintiff has no oral evidence and documents produced on the side of the petitioner are marked as Exts.A1 to A6 and the commission report is marked as Ext.C1 and the plaintiff's evidence was closed and for defendant's evidence the case was adjourned to 3.8.2008. It is not evidenced from the said order as to whether any objection had been raised to marking of Exts.A2 and A5 by the counsel for the defendants. However, it is seen that Ext.A2 is only a photostat copy and not an authentic copy and Ext.A5 though retained as copy by taking out copy in Court and certified by the examiner as true copy the defence had no occasion to see the original of Ext.A5. In the result the respondent is directed to produce the originals of Exts.A2 and A5 in the court WPC 27211/2008 2 below and to get back those documents after retaining copies in Court for the purpose of the case, with notice to the counsel for the plaintiff. Both parties shall be entitled to adduce further evidence if they so choose. To the above extent Ext.P4 order is set aside. The Court below is directed to expedite the trial of the case as the suit is one of the year 2002. Writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Transmit a copy of this judgment to the Trial Court forthwith. K.P.BALACHANDRAN JUDGE jj