IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN THURSDAY, THE 18TH MARCH 2010 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 9121 of 2010(O) ------------------------------------- (OS.NO.585/2007 OF SUB COURT,ERNAKULAM) .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- SULOCHANA, D/O. LATE SARADA, AGED 62 YEARS, PARIYADATH HOUSE, ELAMARA ROAD, TRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. MR.T.MADHU, SMT.C.R.SARADAMANI. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. RAGHAVENDRN, S/O. LATE T.V.RAMACHANDRA RAO, AGED 51 YEARS, SREE VIHAR, THERLAK ROAD, NEAR SANSKRIT COLLEGE, THRIPUNITHUR.P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. K.R.VENKITARAMANAN, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O. LATE T.V. RAMACHANDRA RAO, HOTEL KRISHNA BHAVAN, NEAR T.D.M. HALL, ERNAKULAM SOUTH.P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. K.SANTHA, D/O. LATE SARADA, MATTAVANA, KADAKKEMADOM, KEEZHUCHERIMEL, CHENGANOOR.P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 4. RATNAMMA, D/O. LATE SARADA, HARINIVAS, VIKAS NGAR, THRIPUNITHURA.P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 5. K.RADHA, D/O. LATE SARADA, SREE VIHAR, THERLAK ROAD, NEAR SANSKRIT COLLEGE, THRIPUNITHURA.P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/03/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P. BHAVADASAN, J. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= W.P.(C) No.9121 of 2010 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 18th day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT This is a petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the Sub Court, Ernakulam to keep in abeyance the trial of O.S. No.585 of 2007 for a period of ten days and also, in the meantime, to issue a carbon copy of the order dated 12-3-2010 in I.A. No.2281 of 2010. 2. Petitioner is the addl. 3rd defendant in O.S. No.585 of 2007 on the file of the Sub Court, Ernakulam. A copy of the plaint is produced as Ext.P1. The suit was for partition of the plaint schedule property. The petitioner and others were arrayed as defendants, consequent on the death of 1st defendant. The petitioner filed an additional written statement on 19-11-2009, a copy of which is produced as Ext.P2. Contention of the petitioner was that the property involved in the suit was gifted by her grand-father late Ramachandra Rao in favour of the 1st defendant. Later, the 1st defendant executed a Will in her favour. W.P.(C) No. 9121/10 2 3. The suit was listed for trial on 17-3-2010. The petitioner moved I.A. No.2281 of 2010 seeking to have the suit removed from the list. She wanted time to produce the Will, on which she relies. It was stated that original of the Will was produced in another suit, O.S. No. 394 of 2006 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Ernakulam. That suit was disposed of and the matter was pending in appeal as A.S. No.370 of 2008 before the District Court, Ernakulam and entire records have been forwarded to the District Court, Ernakulam. Though she had applied for a certified copy of the Will, it is not made available to her. Therefore, she was unable to produce the same to the present suit. Under these circumstances, the prayer was made. The court below rejected the prayer. 4. The petitioner says that she has applied for a certified copy of the Will, but has not received the same. In the meanwhile, the suit is listed and is going to be tried. If the suit is tried, without enabling the petitioner to produce the Will, she will put to irreparable loss and hardship. W.P.(C) No. 9121/10 3 5. In the light of the order that is sought to be passed, notice to the respondents is not necessary. 6. Petitioner requires for a direction to issue a carbon copy of the order dated 12-3-2010 in I.A. No.2281 of 2010 for which she had already applied. Another prayer is that till that copy is issued, trial of the suit may be kept in abeyance. 7. Considering the facts of the case, the request made is quite reasonable. 8. In the result, there will be a direction to the Sub Court, Ernakulam to issue a carbon copy of the order dated 12-3-2010 in I.A. No.2281 of 2010 forthwith, at any rate within a week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is also directed that the trial of the suit shall be kept in abeyance for a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of this judgment. P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE. mn.