IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 8TH APRIL 2011 / 18TH CHAITHRA 1933 OP(C).No. 1432 of 2011(O) ------------------------- OS.65/1953 of SUB COURT, THALASSERY .................... PETITIONER : ------------------- DAMODARAN NAIR, AGED 53 YEARS, S/O. KELAPPAN NAIR, AYYAPPANKANDI HOUSE, P.O.CHENOLI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN-673 525. BY ADV. SRI.N.M.MADHU SMT.C.S.RAJANI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. MUTHUVAT CHERIYOTTI AMMA, VALYAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KALPATHOOR POST, VALYAKODE DESOM, KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN-673 524. 2. KRISHNAN NAIR, S/O. MUTHUVAT CHERIYOTTI AMMA, VALYAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KALPATHOOR POST, VALYAKODE DESOM, KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN-673 524. THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. -------------------------------------- O.P.(C).No.1432 of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of April, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner applied for certified copy of the final decree in O.S.No.65 of 1953 on the file of the Sub Court, Thalassery. It is stated that the records of the case are now available before the District Court, Kozhikode. Therefore, the application was filed before the District Court, Kozhikode. The application was returned stating that Exhibit C3 plan which is part of the final decree is not legible. 2. Thereafter, the petitioner filed another application for issuing certified copy of the final decree excluding Exhibit C3 plan. That application was also returned as per the following order : "Exhibit C3 is part of the final decree. O.P.(C) No.1432/2011 2 Petitioner intends to get the copy of the final decree excluding Exhibit C3. Exhibit C3 has become illegible due to old age. Part of a document is not admissible in evidence. So the request for giving the part of the final decree excluding Exhibit C3 cannot be allowed. Hence, petition rejected." 3. In this Original Petition, the petitioner challenges the order returning the application for certified copy of the final decree. It is stated that the petitioner is the son-in-law of a party to the final decree and that the copy of the final decree is required for him for the purpose of another case. 4. Rule 239 of the Civil Rules of Practice provides for submitting application for copies. The Rule provides that any person entitled to obtain a copy of any proceeding or document filed in or in the custody of the court, may present an application therefor as in Form No.47 setting out the O.P.(C) No.1432/2011 3 name of the applicant, his position in the suit or proceeding if he is a party thereto and the description of the document of which copy is required. Rule 240 provides for application for copies by strangers who are not parties to the proceedings. Rule 240 requires an order to be issued by the court granting permission. 5. If a part of a document, copy of which was sought for, is illegible, no provision in the Civil Rules of Practice prohibits issue of a copy of the rest of the document which is legible. The party who applies for certified copy of the decree is not responsible for deterioration of the records or a part of the document becoming illegible. If the other parts of the document, which by themselves would constitute a document, copy of the same can be granted even if a particular portion of the document is illegible. If a particular plan, out of several plans attached to the final decree, is not legible, nothing prevents the court from granting certified copy of the rest. O.P.(C) No.1432/2011 4 However, if the illegible part of the document makes the rest of the document by itself not a sensible document, the court may be justified in refusing to give a copy. Whether the certified copy of part of the document is admissible or not in another case is not relevant while issuing certified copy of the same. Even a full and true certified copy of a document issued by court may not be admissible in another case, depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case. The admissibility or otherwise of a document in evidence is not a matter to be considered by the court while issuing the certified copy. That is a matter to be decided by the court before which the document is produced in evidence. While issuing the copy, the court could also mention that a part of the document being illegible, that part of the document was not issued. For the aforesaid reasons, the Original Petition is allowed and the order passed by the court below is set aside. The District Court, Kozhikode, shall issue certified copy of the final O.P.(C) No.1432/2011 5 decree applied for, excluding Exhibit C3 plan. The certified copy shall also indicate that copy of Exhibit C3 plan is not issued since original of the same is illegible. The petitioner is allowed to re-present the application for issue of certified copy in which case the court shall take it on file and issue certified copy as indicated above. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl