K.T. Sankaran, J.

1. While hearing appeals in civil cases, we have noticed that the records sent from the lower courts are not arranged in a proper manner. After the plaint, sometimes the vakalat or an Interlocutory Application is seen placed. Documents marked in the case are also not seen placed one after the other. After Exhibit A1, you may find PW1 and the other Exhibits will be found somewhere else. The depositions of witnesses are also seen placed in the same way. On searching the records, one would find that what is important is the Index and page numbers. One would get the impression that whichever paper comes to the hands of the record clerk is numbered and indexed, unmindful of the nature of the same. When the appeals taken up for hearing, the Court Officer has to look into the index, search the records, take out the relevant document and give it to the Judges. This is a laborious work and it consume slot of time. We are of the view that the lower court records should be arranged in the following manner :

(i) The plaint.

(ii) The written statement/additional written statement, if any

(iii) Replication, if any

(iv) Documents marked on the side of the plaintiffs-A series.

(v) Documents marked on the side of the defendants- B series.

(vi) Third party Exhibits-X series

(vii) Commissioner's report and plans-C series.

(viii) Evidence on the side of the plaintiffs PWs

(ix) Evidence on the side of the defendants DWs

(x) Court witnesses CWs.

2. All other interlocutory applications can be arranged date wise and year wise, so that it can be taken out without any difficulty. Counter affidavit/counter statement in an Interlocutory Application can be placed inside the same or as the next following document. If the papers are arranged in the above manner, it can be easily handled by the Court Officer sand Judges and considerable time can be saved.

We are of the view that a Circular in this regard can be issued to all the subordinate civil courts. Place this matter before the Honourable the Acting Chief Justice for appropriate orders.

JUDGMENT :

1. The defendants in O.S.No.293 of 2001 on the file of the court of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Thrissur are the appellants. The suit was filed by the respondent for specific performance of Exhibit A1 agreement for sale. The trial court decreed the suit.

2. According to the plaintiff, Exhibit A1 agreement for sale dated 2.12.2000 was executed between the plaintiff and the first defendant for a total consideration of Rs. 3,40,000/-. An advance amount of Rs. 1,65,000/- was paid by the plaintiff. The date for completion of the transaction was fixed as 25.3.2001.The agreement was signed by the second defendant on behalf of the first defendant as his power of attorney holder. The defendants committed default in executing the assignment deed. There fore, the plaintiff sent Exhibits A2 and A4 notices dated13.3.2001 and 19.3.2001 respectively. Exhibit A7 reply was sent by the second defendant in reply to Exhibits A2 and A4.The second defendant also sent Exhibit A6 letter dated23.3.2001 to the plaintiff. The suit was filed on 30.3.2001.

3. Separate written statements were filed by the defendants. The sum and substance of the defence is as follows : On 31.5.1999, an agreement was executed between the plaintiff and the first defendant for sale of the same property for the same consideration and an advance of Rs. 1,65,000/- was paid by the plaintiff. That agreement was cancelled and destroyed since the plaintiff was not ready with the money to pay the balance consideration. Thereafter, another agreement dated 25.4.2000 was executed between the parties on the same terms and conditions as contained in the previous agreement. Again, the plaintiff could not arrange money for completing the transaction and on his request, the agreement was cancelled and destroyed. The sum of Rs. 1,65,000/- paid by the plaintiff was returned to the plaintiff in the presence of Gopi, the document writer (who was examined as DW2). Ex