IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Murali Purushothaman, J
Baby Joseph – Appellant
Versus
C.K. Babu – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. suit facts and trial proceedings leading to recall application. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 2. parties' contentions on witness recall and delays. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 11) |
| 3. limits of order 18 rule 17; upholding trial discretion. (Para 13) |
J U D G M E N T
This original petition is filed challenging Ext.10 order passed by the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Thodupuzha in I.A. No. 56 of 2025 in O.S. No. 46 of 2010. The suit is filed by the petitioner and respondents 4 to 8 herein for declaration and recovery of possession. 2. According to the plaintiffs, the suit property belonging to them was purported to have been sold in favour of defendants 2 to 4 (respondents 1 to 3) on the strength of a forged power of attorney executed by fraud and impersonation. Later, the defendants 2 to 4 sold the property to additional defendants 6 to 9 (respondents 11 to 14).
3. The suit was included in the additional list for trial on 24.07.2024. On 24.07.2024, the petitioner herein was examined as PW1 in part and Exts. A1 to A34, C1, C1(a), C2 and C2(a) were marked. Defendants 2 to 4 filed I.A No. 46 of 2024 seeking time for cross-examination of PW1 by additional defendants 6 to 9. The said application was
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.