IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2011 / 10TH CHAITHRA 1933 FAO.No. 388 of 2010 ----------------------------- [I.A. NO.2639/2010 IN OS.NO.375/2009 OF PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, NORTH PARAVUR] .................... APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFFS: -------------------------------------------------------------- 1. M/S.METALANDS, A PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT THOTTUMOOLA ROAD, MURINGOOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT AND HAVING A BRANCH OFFICE AT 18/464, N.H.BYE PASS ROAD, ALUVA, REP. BY T.V.BHAVADAS, AGED 58, S/O.LATE T.K.VASUDEVAN, MANAGER. 2. BABY.P.O., AGED 42, S/O.OUSEPH, PALATTY HOUSE, MOOKKANNOOR, MANAGING PARTNER M/S.METALANDS A PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT THOTTUMOOLA ROAD, MURINGOOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT AND HAVING A BRANCH OFFICE AT 18/464, N.H.BYE PASS ROAD, ALUVA. BY ADVS. SRI.K.NARAYANAN (PARUR), SRI.V.RAJENDRAN (PERUMBAVOOR). RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. K.MANOHARAN, AGED ABOUT 47, S/O.E.N.NAIR, KATTASSERY HOUSE, RESIDING AT HARI KRISHNA, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR, PROPRIETOR JABALCO INTERNATIONAL POONKUNNAM, THRISSUR. 2. JAYALAKSHMY MANOHARAN, AGED ABOUT 39, W/O.K.MANOHARAN, KATTASSERY HOUSE, RESIDING AT HARI KRISHNA, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR. R1 & R2 BY ADVS. SRI.K.B.MOHANDAS, SRI.LELLULAL T.G.THUNDATHIL. THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: F.A.O. NO. 388/2010: ORDER ON I.A. NO. 4482/2010 IN F.A.O. NO.388/2010 DISMISSED SD/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE, 31/03/2011. SD/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan & S.S.Satheesachandran, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = F.A.O.No.388 of 2010 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 31st day of March, 2011. Judgment Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J. Read our order dated 14th March, 2011. As noted therein, quite elaborately, the law on the point is covered in favour of the appellant-plaintiff by the Bench decision of this Court in Ramasubramoniam v. Ranganathan[1978 KLT 906] and Jose Paul v. Jose[AIR 2002 Kerala 397]. Following that order, the learned counsel for the respondent pointed out that such an angle was not presented before the court below by making reference to those precedents. That may be the reason why the court below had passed the impugned order quite in contradiction to the law laid in Ramasubramoniam and Jose Paul. In the light of the two decisions referred to above, FAO388/10 -: 2 :- we set aside the impugned order and hold that the court below has territorial jurisdiction to try the suit from which this appeal arises. The parties are directed to appear before the court below on 23rd May, 2011. A copy of the order dated 14.3.2011 will stand appended to this order. This appeal is allowed as above. No costs. Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, Judge. S.S.Satheesachandran, Judge. Sha/0404