IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 13TH JULY 2009 / 22ND ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 19538 of 2009(O) -------------------------- OS.468/2003 of ADDL.SUB COURT,KOTTAYAM .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. GOVINDAN NAIR, S/O.NEELANDAN NAIR, AGED 78 YEARS, VATTAPARAMBIL HOUSE, VIJAYAPURAM KARA, MANARCAD VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM TALUK. 2. KARTHIYAYANI AMMA, W/O.DIVAKARAN NAIR, AGED 61 YEARS, MULAKIZHAKKETHIL HOUSE, PARIYARAMKARA, PARIYARAM PO, THOTTAKKAD VILLAGE. 3. RAVI MANOHAR, S/O.RAMAN NAIR, AGED 51 YEARS, VATTAPARAMBIL HOUSE, VIJAYAPURAM KARA, MANARCAD VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM TALUK. 4. PADMAKUMARY, W/O.K.G.BABU, AGED 55 YEARS, PADMANIVAS, KUZHIPURAYIDAMKARA, MANARCAD VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM TALUK. BY ADV. MR.KISHOR B. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. RAM MANOHAR, S/O.RAMAN NAIR, AGED 50 YEARS, VETTIPARAMBIL HOUSE, VIJAYAPURAM KARA, MANARCADU VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM TALUK. 2. GOPI MANOHAR, S/O.RAMAN NAIR, AGED 49 YEARS, VETTIPARAMBIL HOUSE, VIJAYAPURAM KARA, MANARCADU VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM TALUK. 3. SIVA MANOHAR, S/O.RAMAN NAIR, AGED 48 YERS, VETTIPARAMBIL HOUSE, VIJAYAPURAM KARA, MANARCADU VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM TALUK. 4. M.KAMALAKSHY AMMA, W/O.RAMAN NAIR, AGED 80 YEARS, VETTIPARAMBIL HOUSE, VIJAYAPURAM KARA, MANARCAD VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM TALUK. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/07/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 19538 OF 2009 O ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 13th day of July, 2009 J U D G M E N T The writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:- (i) Call for the records relating to Os.468/03 on the file of the Additional Sub Court, Kottayam and set aside Ext.P3 order passed in IA.1085/09 on 23.6.09. (ii) Issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus or any other writ, order or direction to the Additional Sub Court, Kottayam to reopen the evidence and allow the petitioners to produce further documents and mark the same through the witness already examined on his side.” 2. Petitioners are the plaintiffs in OS.No.468/03 on the file of the Additional Sub Judge, Kottayam. The above suit is being tried jointly with two other suits and evidence in the case was recorded in the present case treating it as the main case. After the entire evidence on both sides was over and the case posted for hearing, the petitioners moved an application for reopening the evidence which was objected to by the defendants. The learned WPC.19538/09 : 2 : Munsiff, after hearing both sides, dismissed that application. Ext.P3 is the copy of that order. Impeaching the propriety and correctness of that order, the petitioners have filed this writ petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this court. 3. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. Having regard to the submissions made and the facts and circumstances presented, I find no notice to the respondents is necessary, and hence it is dispensed with. Perusing Ext.P3 order passed by the learned Sub Judge and the submissions made by the learned counsel, I find no impropriety or illegality in that order. Reopening of the evidence was sought for by the petitioners to exhibit some documents which were not even produced along with the petition. Without knowing the relevance of the documents and giving an opportunity to the other side, after closing of the evidence, the court could not have allowed the application for reopening the evidence. Writ petition is devoid of any merit, and it is dismissed. Sd/- (S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE) aks