IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 2ND AUGUST 2007 / 11TH SRAVANA 1929 WP(C).No. 18854 of 2003(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ SUSHIL THOMAS ABRAHAM, SON OF C.J.ABRAHAM, CHENNATTU, PANAVILA JUNCTION, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. . SMT.PREETHY KARUNAKARAN SRI.R.RAJESH KORMATH SMT.SANJANA R.NAIR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. M/S.SKYLINE BUILDERS, II FLOOR, LEKSHMI CHAMBERS, POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER P.KRISHNAN, NACHIKETAN, POOJAPPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. P.KRISHNAN, PARTNER, M/S.SKYLINE BUILDERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, RESIDING AT NACHIKETAN, POOJAPPURAM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. K.SRIKANTH,SON OF P.KRISHNAN PARTNER, M/S.SKYLINE BUILDERS, RESIDING AT NACHIKETAN, POOJAPPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. K.LAVA, SON OF P.KRISHNAN, PARTNER, M/S.SKYLINE BUILDERS, RESIDING AT NACHIKETAN, POOJAPPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. PARVATHY KRISHNAN, W/O. P.KRISHNAN, PARTNER, M/S.SKYLINE BUILDERS, RESIDING AT NACHIKETAN, POOJAPPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. RAMA SRIKANTH, W/O. SRIKANTH, PARTNER M/S SKYLINE BUILDERS, RESIDING AT NACHIKETAN, POOJAPPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 7. C.G.SAMBANDAM, GENERAL MANAGER (PROJECT) M/S SKYLINE BUILDERS, RESIDING AT CHOLAPPALLY AMBALLOOR LANE, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. (NAME OF THE 7TH RESPONDENT IS WRONGLY SHOWN IN THE ORDER) WP(C).No. 18854 of 2003 BY ADV. SRI.K.L.NARASIMHAN SRI.A.MOHAMMED FAIZAL SRI.K.L.NARASIMHAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/08/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 18854 of 2003 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 6.6.03 IN I.A.1607 OF 2003 IN O.S.227 OF 2000 COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL SUBORDINATE JUDGE OF TRIVANDRUM. (TRUE COPY) P.A TO JUDGE M.N.KRISNAN, J. -------------------------------- W.P.(C). 18854/2003 ----------------------------- Dated this 2nd day of August, 2007 JUDGMENT This writ petition is filed seeking a direction to set aside Ext.P1 order. The plaintiff in the suit filed an application to get a certificate for the purpose of enabling him to get documents from the Director of Economic and Statistics. In spite of the same, it was not given to him. Thereafter, he moved an application to summon the Director to produce those documents. The Court had closed the application on the ground that documents were produced before the Court and therefore the purpose of summons is served. 2. If the plaintiff requires the examination of the official witness for any purpose, let it be considered by the Court and if necessary summon and examine him, if there is such prayer. If the entire documents which the plaintiff wants are not made available, the plaintiff is at liberty to move an application to summon for those documents as well. With this observation this writ petition is disposed of. M.N.KRISHNAN,JUDGE mrcs W.P.(C).18854/2003 2