IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2008 / 24TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 1591 of 2008(M) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ KEERAMPARA PANCHAYAT FISH FARMERS SOCIETY REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT JOSEPH KURIAN, MALIYIL HOUSE, KONDIMATTOM KARA, KEERAMPARA VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM. BY ADV. SMT.T.D.RAJALAKSHMI SRI. E.R. VENKITESWARAN RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. PERIYAR AND PAREEKANNI RUBBERS LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR JOHN THOMAS, KOTTUKAPPALLY, PERIYAR AND PAREEKANNI RUBBERS LTD., PALA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. MATHEW THARAKAN, IYNATTUPARAYIL HOUSE, KOZHIPPILLY KARA, KOTHAMANGALAM VILLAGE. 3. VISWANATHAN, SUPERVISOR, AVOLYCHAL, PALAMATTOM, KEERAMPARA VILLAGE. 4. THE CHIEF SECRETARY, STATE OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. SECRETARY, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PERIYAR VALLEY IRRIGATION PROJECT, KAD DIVISION, PERUMBAVOOR. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. R.BINDHU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.C. NO. 1591 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 14th day of January, 2008. J U D G M E N T This writ petition is filed against the order of the Subordinate Judge, Muvattupuzha in O.S.169/03 whereby the suit has been dismissed for default. The grievance of the plaintiff is to the effect that the person representing the plaintiff was unable to climb up, prayed for time. The Court did not favourably consider it and without looking into the facts that the Commission has already been issued for examination, had dismissed the suit. I feel the approach of the Court below is not appreciable. But at the same time the Court has also invoked its jurisdiction and dismissed the suit. Therefore the proper remedy for the party is to file an application under Order 9 Rule 9 CPC for restoration. Taking the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case I feel the Court has to consider and allow when an application is filed under Order 9 Rule 9 CPC and then give opportunity to the W.P.C 1591 OF 2008 -:2:- plaintiff and the defendant and then dispose of the matter in accordance with law. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-