IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN FRIDAY, THE 12TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 21ST KARTHIKA 1932 FAO.No. 360 of 2010() --------------------------- IA.9179/10,IA. NO. 660/09 IN OS.337/2008 of PRL.SUB COURT,THRISSUR .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF: --------------------------------------------------- E.O.LAWRENCE, PROPRIETOR, M/S.LEMIN TRADERS, EDAKKALATHUR HOUSE, WELCOME VILLA, POONKUNNAM P.O., THRISSUR. BY ADVS. SRI.P.R.VENKETESH SRI.P.R.RAJA RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT/ DEFENDANT: ------------------------------------------------------------------- SAKTHAN KURIES & LOANS (P) LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, PALLIKULAM ROAD, THRISSUR VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK. 680001. THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/11/2010, ALONG WITH FAO. NO.361 OF 2010 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan & P.Bhavadasan, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = FAO.Nos.360 and 361 of 2010 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 12th day of November, 2010. Judgment Bhavadasan, J. 1.As common questions arise for consideration in these appeals, they are being disposed of by a common judgment. 2.The plaintiffs preferred applications under Order XI Rule 21 for striking of defence on the ground that the defendant has not complied with the direction of the court to produce the documents or file affidavit. The court below refused to accept the plea put-forth by the petitioners and dismissed the petitions. The said orders are assailed. 3.All that the court below has done is to refuse striking of the defence on the ground that the affidavit, as directed, has not been filed. It is to be noted that the suits are yet to go for trial. The observations made by the court below FAO360 & 361/10 -: 2 :- are only for the purpose of deciding the interlocutory application filed by the plaintiffs in the suits. It cannot have any impact in the trial of the suits at all. 4.We clarify that none of the rights of the plaintiffs or defendant at trial will be prejudiced by the impugned orders or any observation made therein with regard to admissibility, marking or evidentiary value of the documents to be produced at trial. It will be open to the court below to draw adverse inference, if it is permissible in law. With the above observations, these appeals are dismissed. Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, Judge. P.Bhavadasan, Judge. Sha/1511