AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
C.S Dias, J
The original petition is filed to set aside the order in IA 1/2020 (Ext P1) in OS 52/2017 of the Court of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Kottayam.
The facts in a nutshell, relevant for the determination of the original petition are: The petitioner is the defendant in the above suit, which is filed by the respondent. The respondent had filed IA 1/2020, seeking leave to amend the pleadings. The petitioner had filed Ext P2 objection to Ext P1. However, the court below without considering the objection in Ext P2, has passed Ext P3 order. Ext P3 is vitiated and erroneous. Hence, the original petition.
Heard; Sri.M.B Sandeep, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.P.Chandy Joseph, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
Sri.P.Chandy Joseph, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent has fairly conceded that the court below has passed Ext P3 order without adverting to Ext P2 written objection.
In the light of the fact that Ext P3 order has been passed without adverting to Ext P2 written objection filed by the petitioner, I am of the view that Ext P3 is erroneous and wrong. Thus, in exercise of the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, I am inclined to allow the original petition in the following manner:
(i) Ext P3 order is set aside
(ii) The court below is directed to consider Ext P1 application after adverting to Ext P2 written objection filed by the petitioner.
(iii) The court below shall pass orders on Ext P1 application, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment as observed above.
(iv) Since the suit is of the year 2017, the court below shall make every endevour to dispose of the suit, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible.