Research › Browse › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

1997 DIGILAW 322 (KER)

Muhammed v. Munsiff, Tirur

1997-08-21

K.A.ABDUL GAFOOR

body1997
Judgment :- K.A. Abdul Gafoor, J. The petitioner is the judgment debtor before the 1st respondent who pronounced an order on 4.8.97 in E.P. 5/97 in O.S.151/1997. Based on the report from the Ameen who did not point out the existence of the thatched shed, order was issued for delivering the property. The decree did not mention about any thatched shed. Therefore, the petitioner contended that the area should be correctly demarcated before delivery is effected. It is in the above circumstances, the petitioner wants to take up the matter further. If delivery is effected as ordered, that will stand to undue advantage to the decree holder as no thatched shed is directed to be delivered. The petitioner applied for a carbon copy. But he was not provided with immediately though he was entitled to one immediately. It is in the above circumstances, the petitioner has approached this court with this original petition-commanding the 1st respondent to furnish the carbon copy of the order mentioned above. 2. When a judgment of any court is type-written, if it is practicable, copies of the type-written judgment shall be made available to the parties immediately after pronouncement of the judgment on payment of the prescribed charges by the party applying for such copy. It is provided so in Order XX R.6B of the Code of Civil Procedure. Thus, it is an entitlement of a party to the case to get a type-written copy of the judgment as per the said provision. R.239(3) of the Civil Rules of Practice contain a provision that, "any party to the proceeding may, immediately after the judgment or order is pronounced, apply orally to the court for a carbon copy or Photostat copy thereof, and, if the court so directs, a carbon copy or Photostat copy duly certified shall be issued to the party on his making an application for an urgent copy under R.246 accompanied by the copying charges required by R.248". Though judgment is mentioned in O. XX R.6B, the aforesaid Rule in the Civil Rules of Practice mention issuance of Carbon Copy of both the judgment and order pronounced by the Courts. The condition is that the party shall orally apply to the court immediately alter the judgment is pronounced and shall make an application with the prescribed copying charges. Though judgment is mentioned in O. XX R.6B, the aforesaid Rule in the Civil Rules of Practice mention issuance of Carbon Copy of both the judgment and order pronounced by the Courts. The condition is that the party shall orally apply to the court immediately alter the judgment is pronounced and shall make an application with the prescribed copying charges. This rule also makes a party to obtain a carbon copy of the judgment or order as the case may be. 3. It has come to the notice of this court that there are occasions of not furnishing the carbon copies of the order or the judgment to the party applying for, and such party has to approach this court with original petitions like the one on hand. 4. The intention behind the provision for furnishing carbon copy is that any party adversely affected by the order/judgment can take up the matter immediately in higher courts. In the light of the provisions contained in O. XX R.6B of the Code of Civil Procedure and R.239(3) of the Civil Rules of Practice, there is an entitlement to the party. Even though O. XX R.6B of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that it need be given when it is practicable, such words are absent in R.239(3) of the Civil Rules of Practice. 5. Even though these two provisions are on the Statute books that the carbon copy of an order or a judgment shall be immediately or urgently furnished, there occur delay of days together in furnishing the same to the party applying for. 6. It is stated that, it is because of the provision contained in R196 of the Civil Rules of Practice to file the Statement regarding costs, so that the court could finalise the fair copy and issue carbon copy thereof. R.196 provides for 7 days time to file the statement regarding costs and expenses and even that time can be further extended by the court concerned. So, if the carbon copy of the fair copy is awaited, that will necessarily prejudice the party applying for the copy and defeat the purpose of O. XX R.6B of C.P.C. and R.239(3) of the Civil Rules of Practice. So, if the carbon copy of the fair copy is awaited, that will necessarily prejudice the party applying for the copy and defeat the purpose of O. XX R.6B of C.P.C. and R.239(3) of the Civil Rules of Practice. Therefore, taking into account the purpose behind the said provisions, the courts concerned have to issue the carbon copy of the order pronounced provided the application is made in accordance with the said provisions without waiting for preparing the fair copy after furnishing the memo of cost. In other words, the carbon copy to be furnished under the said two provisions is the copy of the order/judgment as pronounced on the date of the order/judgment. Anyhow, in this case, the copy of the order has been given to the petitioner. Therefore, it is only necessary to make, the provision clear. O.P. is therefore, closed.