V.J.PAUL v. THE KERALA STATE ELECGRICITGY BOARD
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 08 Jan 2009
- Bench
- RASHID
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, (TC & M ) KSEB, VAIDYUTHI BHAVAN,PATTOM,THIRUVANANTHAPUAM. ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PETITIONER'S EXTS: APPENDIX EXT.P1 EXT.P2 EXT.P3 EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE…
Judgment
BY ADV. SRI.A.ANTONY SMT.LEELAMMA ANTONY RESPONDENTS: ---------------------
THE KERALA STATE ELECGRICITGY BOARD, VAIDYUTHI BHAVAN,PATTOM,THIRUVANANTHAPUAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
THE CHIEF ENGINEER, (TC & M ) KSEB, VAIDYUTHI BHAVAN,PATTOM,THIRUVANANTHAPUAM. ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PETITIONER'S EXTS: APPENDIX EXT.P1 EXT.P2 EXT.P3 EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE I.A.NO.2448/2007; DATED 3/7/2007 IN O.S.NO.39/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, NORTH PARAVUR. TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION TO EXT.P1 DATED 4/7/2007 IN O.S.NO.39/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, NORTH PARAVUR, FILED BY THE PETITIONER HEREIN. TRUE COPY OF THE I.A.NO.2191/2007 DATED 20/6/2007 IN O.S.NO.39/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, N. PARAVUR. TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION TO EXT.P3 DATED 30/6/2007 IN O.S.NO.39/07 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, NORTH PARAVUR FILED BY THE PETITIONER HEREIN. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN I.A.NO.2448/07 DATED 16/7/2007 IN OS.NO.39/07 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, NORTH PARAVUR. EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.NO.2191/07 DATD 16/7/2007 IN OS.NO.39/07 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, NORTH PARAVUR. HARUN-UL-RASHID,J. --------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.26468 OF 2007 ---------------------------- DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY,2009 JUDGMENT The challenge in this writ petition is against Exts.P5 and P6 orders passed by the Principal Sub Court, North Paravur allowing the petition to enlarge the time for filing the written statement and the petition to set aside the ex parte order dated 15/6/2007 and to receive the written statement.
The K.S.E. Board filed a written statement belatedly stating that in fact the written statement was prepared in time and the same was sent to the Superior Officers to subscribe their signatures and due to some official delay, the written statement could not be filed within time. These applications are opposed by the plaintiff (petitioner herein). Exts.P2 and P4 are the objections. The petitioner contended that there is no justifiable reason for accepting the written statement at the belated stage and therefore there is no justification for granting further time for filing the written statement. Learned counsel for WP(C).No.26468/2007 -2- the petitioner also referred to the decision reported in M/s.Aditya Hotels (P) Ltd. v. Bombay Swadeshi Stores Ltd. and Others (AIR 2007 SC 1574). It appears that the time taken for filing the written statement belatedly is not a deliberate act. The delay was occasioned due to the delay in communication between the Officers of the Board.
Such delay can happen in some cases. For that reason to shut out the defence once for all may not serve the ends of justice. The petitioner should be given an opportunity to contest the case on merits. The trial court rightly held that the applications are liable to be allowed. In the result, this writ petition fails and accordingly it is dismissed. Judge. HARUN-UL-RASHID, kcv.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.