IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 26TH JUNE 2009 / 5TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 4690 of 2009(G) ------------------------- OS.38/2006 of SUB COURT,KATTAPPANA .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- NIMIL ROSE SEBASTIAN, D/O. SEBASTIAN, AGED 21, KAVILPURAYIDATHI HOUSE, KOCHUTHOVALA KARA, KALKOONTHAL VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.VIJU ABRAHAM SRI.JOMON K.CHACKO SRI.JOY C. PAUL SRI.DOMINIC JOHNSON RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. PROPRIETOR, ANCHANA HOSPITAL, KATTAPPANA, KATTAPPANA VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK. 2. DR. LUCY GEORGE, ANCHANA HOSPITAL KATTAPPANA, KATTAPPANA VILLAGE NOW AT NIRMALA HOSPITAL KAMBILIKANDOM, KAMBILIKANDOM KARA, KONNATHADY VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK. 3. SMITHA, D/O. SIVANANDAN, KOLLAMPARAMPIL HOUSE, VELLAYAMKUDY KARA, KONGINIPADAVU BHAGOM, KALKOONTHAL VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK. ADV. SRI.T.J.MICHAEL FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC.4690/09 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.NO.38/06 EXT.P2: COPY OF PETITION I.A.NO.26/09 IN O.S.NO.38/06 EXT.P3: COPY OF ORDER IN I.A.NO.26/09 IN O.S.NO.38/06 /TRUE COPY/ P.A TO JUDGE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.4690 OF 2009 (G) ----------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of June, 2009 J U D G M E N T The writ petition is filed by the plaintiff in O.S.No.38/2006 on the file of the Sub Court, Kattappana. Suit was one for compensation for medical negligence attributed against the defendants. Evidence was completed and the case was posted for argument. At that time, petitioner/plaintiff moved an application for producing some of the documents relating to her treatment which were not produced earlier, to prove her treatment and expenditure incurred. The court below was not inclined to reopen the evidence and admit those documents. The application moved by the plaintiff was dismissed. Ext.P3 is the copy of that order. Aggrieved by that order, impeaching its correctness and propriety, plaintiff has filed this writ petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. WPC.4690/09 2 2. Notice given, the respondents have entered appearance. I heard the counsel on both sides. The learned counsel for the respondents fairly submitted that he is not standing on technical objections, but if at all opportunity is extended to the plaintiff to lead evidence, a direction may be issued to the court below to expedite the trial of the suit and dispose it without any further delay. I find Ext.P3 order is liable to be set aside, and in the nature of the disputes arising for adjudication in the suit plaintiff has to be given permission to produce additional documents, if so required, to substantiate her claim. It is made clear that if any opportunity is sought for by the defendants to lead counter evidence, the court below shall extend them also such opportunity to rebut the fresh evidence adduced by the plaintiff. The learned Sub Judge is further directed to expedite the trial of the suit giving the case top priority in hearing and dispose it at any rate within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Parties are directed to appear before the court below on 6.7.2009. Send a copy of the judgment to WPC.4690/09 3 the court below concerned forthwith. Writ petition is disposed with the above observations. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE prp S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. -------------------------------------------------------- CRL.R.P.NO. OF 2006 () --------------------------------------------------------- O R D E R --------------------------------------------------------- 23rd March, 2009