IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 30TH JULY 2009 / 8TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 18619 of 2009(O) --------------------------------------- OS.NO.220/2005 OF PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,ATTINGAL. .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- MRS. SHEELA RANI,D/O. LATE SIVARAJAN, RESIDING AT DWARAKA NO.1, NEAR RAILWAY STATION, KADAKKAVOOR DESOM. BY ADV. MR.R.ANILKUMAR. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. S.RAVEENDRAN NAIR, S/O.SANKARA PILLAI, SUDINAM, VILAYIL MOOLA, KEEZHATTINGAL VILLAGE, ATTINGAL P.O. 2. SURESHKUMAR, S/O. SIVARAJAN, CHERIYANTHAL VEEDU, KADAKKAVOOR VILLAGE AND DESOM. 3. SUSHAMA, D/O.NARAYANAN, DWARAKA NO.13, NEAR RAILWAY STATION, KADAKKAVOOR DESOM & VILLAGE. R1 BY ADV. MR.M.R.RAJESH, SMT.A.K.PREETHA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/07/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.18619 of 2009 - O --------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of July, 2009 J U D G M E N T The writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: “i) To call for the records in connection with suit 220/2005 in the Sub-court, Attingal in the Supervisory jurisdiction and set aside the Order in I.A.No.2654/2005 in O.s.No.220/2005 dated 4.6.2009 holding that it is highly illegal and the Court had exceeded the power vested in it. ii) To issue such other direction or order to quash Ext.P4 order in I.A.No.2654/2005 in O.S.No.220/2005 in the court of Sub Court, dated 4.6.2009 Attingal as it is unsustainable and the court below had failed to exercise the discretionary jurisdiction in a judicial way”. 2. Petitioner is the first defendant in O.S.No.220/2005 on the file of the Sub Court, Attingal. First respondent is the plaintiff in the suit. Suit was one for money based on a cheque in which the plaintiff impeached the transfer made by the debtor, first defendant, the petitioner herein, in respect of an immovable property in favour of the other defendants in the suit. An application was moved under Order I Rule 8 CPC W.P.(C).No.18619 of 2009 - O 2 to prosecute the suit in a representative capacity to impeach the transfer made as a fraudulent transfer under Section 53 of the Transfer of Properties Act. Though the application was allowed, no steps were taken for publication. Only after the case came up for trial, the defect in publication was noticed and then, on an application moved by the plaintiff for enlargement of time to effect the publication it was allowed by the learned Sub Judge. Propriety and correctness of that order is impeached by the petitioner/defendant invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 3. I heard the counsel on both sides. 4. Having regard to the submissions made and also the facts and circumstances presented with reference to Ext.P4 order passed by the learned Sub Judge allowing the petition to publish notice condoning the delay in effecting that publication earlier, I find this is not a fit case where the exercise of supervisory jurisdiction of this Court is called for to examine the merit and correctness of the discretion exercised by the learned sub Judge in condoning the delay and ordering publication. W.P.(C).No.18619 of 2009 - O 3 Reserving the right of the petitioner to impeach the late publication made on whatsoever grounds available and how far it affect the merit of the case at the final hearing, after recording of evidence and with direction to the court below to consider the tenability of such objections, if raised, at that stage, untrammelled by the findings and observations made in Ext.P4 order, the writ petition is closed. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. bkn/-