P. O. Jose and others v. Catholic Truth Charitable Society and others

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN** **FRIDAY, THE 22[ND] DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 2ND CHAITHRA, 1946** **OP(C) NO. 304 OF 2024** **AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 05.01.2024 IN OS NO.1514 OF 2019 OF III ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM (RENT CONTROL)** ## **PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS/DEFENDANTS NO.9 TO 12:** **1 P. O JOSE, AGED 65 YEARS S/O OUSEPH, PARAPPILLY HOUSE, TYNOTHIL KADAVU ROAD, ALUVA VILLAGE, ALUVA TALUK,ALUVA P.O, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683101 2 TESSY JOSE, AGED 63 YEARS W/O P.O JOSE, PARAPPILLY HOUSE, TYNOTHIL KADAVU ROAD, ALUVA VILLAGE, ALUVA TALUK,ALUVA P.O, ERNAKULAM-, PIN - 683101 3 GOLWIN JOSE, AGED 30 YEARS S/O P.O JOSE, PARAPPILLY HOUSE, TYNOTHIL KADAVU ROAD, ALUVA VILLAGE, ALUVA TALUK,ALUVA P.O, ERNAKULAM-, PIN - 683101 4 BAIJI BENNY, AGED 45 YEARS W/O BENNY, KODIYAN HOUSE, PALATHURUTHU KARA, CHENDAMANGALAM VILLAGE, PARAVUR TALUK, CHENDAMANGALAM P.O, PIN-, PIN - 683512 BY ADVS. P.MARTIN JOSE P.PRIJITH THOMAS P.KURUVILLA R.GITHESH AJAY BEN JOSE MANJUNATH MENON SACHIN JACOB AMBAT ANNA LINDA EDEN KARTHIKA SAROJ HARIKRISHNAN S. S.SREEKUMAR (SR.)** ## **RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/PLAINIFFS:** **1 CATHOLIC TRUTH CHARITABLE SOCIETY, REG.NO. EKM /TC/538/18 CLASSIC TOWER, REPRESENTED BY** **O.P.(C).No. 304 of 2024** ..2.. **TIS PRESIDENT SEBASTIN KOIKKARA KURIAN, S/O KURIAN, AGED 66 KOIKKARA HOUSE B.O.C ROAD, PERMBAVOOR PIN-, PIN - 683542** - **2 CATHOLIC TRUTH CHARITABLE SOCIETY, REG.NO. EKM /TC/538/18, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, JOSHI, S/O VARGHESE, AGED 56,THELAKKADAN HOUSE, PERUMBAVOOR, PIN-, PIN - 683542** - **3 SEBASTIN, AGED 66 YEARS S/O KURIAN,AGED KOIKKARA HOUSE, B.O.C ROAD, PERMBAVOOR PIN-, PIN - 683542** - **4 VARGHESE, AGED 56 YEARS S/O JOSHI, THELAKKADAN HOUSE,PULLUVAZHI, PERUMBAVOOR, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, RAYAMANGALAM VILLAGE, PIN - 683542** **BY ADVS. V.RAJENDRAN (PERUMBAVOOR) N.RAJESH(K/1717/1999) GOPAKUMAR P.(K/1116-C/2011) GIMMY P ANTONY(K/000150/1989)** **THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **O.P.(C).No. 304 of 2024** **==> picture [37 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** ## **J U D G M E N T** ## _**Dated this the 22[nd] day of March, 2024**_ **Petitioners herein are defendants 9 to 12 in the suit O.S.No.1514/2019 of the IIIrd Additional Munsiff Court, Ernakulam. Petitioners are aggrieved by Ext.P5 order, which rejected Ext.P3 application to enlarge the time fixed for filing, as also, to receive the written statement.** **2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the respondents/plaintiffs.** **3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that, on 05.06.2023, the trial court fixed a period of 30 days for filing the written statement. It is true that the case was posted for written statement on several occasions prior to** **O.P.(C).No. 304 of 2024** **==> picture [37 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** **the said date. However, the petitioners could not file the written statement within the stipulated time and there occurred a delay of 42 days in filing the written statement, reckoned from the date within which written statement was directed to be filed by the trial court. It was in such circumstance that the petitioners filed Ext.P3 application to enlarge the time and also to receive the written statement. However, the same is dismissed vide Ext.P5 order, for the reason that the delay is not properly explained.** **4. This application was seriously opposed by the learned counsel for the respondents. Learned counsel by relying upon the judgment in Hon'ble Supreme Court in** _**Om Prakash Gupta v. Union of India**_ **[2000 KHC 1897], which held that, since the written statement was not filed within a period of more than two years, the indulgence shown by the High Court was not justified.** **O.P.(C).No. 304 of 2024** ..5.. **5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, this Court notice that, the policy of law is to have adjudication of matters on merits and not on technicalities. It is true that the petitioners were given opportunity to file written statement earlier, which opportunity was not, however, availed by the petitioners. Ultimately, the Court granted 30 days time on 05.06.2023 to file the written statement. Written statement was in fact filed, but not within 30 days, but with a delay of 42 days. This Court is of the view that, inasmuch as the written statement has already been filed, it may not be in the interests of justice to deny an opportunity of the petitioners to contest the matter on merits, especially having regard to the seriousness of the reliefs sought for in the suit. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in** _**Salem Advocate Bar Association, T.N. v. Union of India**_ **[2005 (6) SCC 344], held** **O.P.(C).No. 304 of 2024** **==> picture [37 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** **that the period stipulated for filing the written statement as per the Code, is not mandatory, but only directory. The spirit of the judgment is to ensure that, in appropriate cases the parties should be given the opportunity to file written statement and to contest the matter on merits. In the instant case, it is all the more so, in view of the sweeping reliefs sought for in the suit.** **6. In the circumstances, this Original Petition is allowed and the delay of 42 days in filing the written statement is condoned, subject to the condition that the petitioners pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand only) to respondents 1 to 4, who are the plaintiffs in the suit, within a period of one month from today (22.03.2024). Once the payment as directed above is reported, the learned Munsiff will allow Ext.P3 application and will accept the written statement on files and will proceed with the matter, in** **O.P.(C).No. 304 of 2024** **==> picture [37 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** **accordance with law. In case the payment as directed above is not made as stipulated above, the dismissal of Ext.P3 application will stand confirmed.** **The Original Petition is disposed of, as above.** Sd/- **C. JAYACHANDRAN JUDGE** **TR** **O.P.(C).No. 304 of 2024** ..8.. ## **APPENDIX OF OP(C) 304/2024** |**PETITIONER**|**EXHIBITS**| |---|---| |**Exhibit P1**|**TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S. NO.**| ||**1514 OF 2019 OF IIIRD ADDITIONAL**| ||**MUNSIFFS COURT, ERNAKULAM.**| |**Exhibit P2**|**TRUE COPY OF WRITTEN STATEMENT IN O.S.**| ||**NO. 1514 OF 2019 OF MUNSIFFS COURT**| ||**ERNAKULAM DATED 16-08-2023**| |**Exhibit P3**|**TRUE COPY OF PETITION TO ACCEPT THE**| ||**WRITTEN STATEMENT IN I.A. NO. 5 OF 2023**| ||**DATED 16-08-2023**| |**Exhibit P4**|**TRUE COPY OF OBJECTION FILED BY**| ||**RESPONDENTS DATED 27-10-2023**| |**Exhibit P5**|**TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 05-01-2024 IN**| ||**I.A. NO. 5 OF 2023 OF IIIRD ADDITIONAL**| ||**MUNSIFF COURT ERNAKULAM**|