Research › Search › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 636 (KER)

Maya. R. Nair v. Chirayil A. S. , Krishnan

2011-06-24

K.T.SANKARAN

body2011
JUDGMENT :- The petitioners are the plaintiffs in O.S.No.58 of 2011 on the file of the court of the Munsiff of Changanassery. The suit was filed for eviction of the respondent from the plaint schedule building. The respondent filed O.S.No.302 of 2010 against the petitioners before the same court for an injunction restraining the defendants from evicting the plaintiff therein (respondent herein) otherwise than in accordance with law. Both these suits are pending. 2. The petitioners filed I.A.No.1050 of 2011 in O.S.No.58 of 2011 for joint trial of that suit along with O.S.No.302 of 2010. It is stated that O.S.No.302 of 2010 is posted in the special list for trial on 10.8.2011. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the steps in O.S.No.58 of 2011 are not complete. 3. The prayer in the Original Petition is to issue a direction to the learned Munsiff to take up both the suits together, to conduct a joint trial and to dispose of the suits by a common judgment. The prayer as such cannot be allowed. The trial court has to decide whether joint trial should be ordered. The only relief that can be granted in the case is to direct the learned Munsiff to dispose of the application for joint trial expeditiously. I do so. Since O.S.No.302 of 2010 is listed for trial on 10.8.2011, the learned Munsiff shall dispose of the application for joint trial on or before 25th July 2011. 4. Before parting with the case, it is necessary to note that in the photocopy of the plaint in O.S.No.58 of 2011 and in the photocopy of I.A.No.1050 of 2011, no date is shown. I have noticed in several other cases as well that in the pleadings, affidavits and other papers filed in courts, dates were not shown. In cases where the dates are relevant, it would be difficult to take a proper decision if the dates are not shown. In the present case, it is not seen whether I.A.No.1050 of 2011 was filed long back or whether it was filed just before filing of the Original Petition. 5. The pleadings, affidavits and other papers filed in court must necessarily bear the date. In the affidavit, it should be stated on which date it was sworn to and attested. In the present case, it is not seen whether I.A.No.1050 of 2011 was filed long back or whether it was filed just before filing of the Original Petition. 5. The pleadings, affidavits and other papers filed in court must necessarily bear the date. In the affidavit, it should be stated on which date it was sworn to and attested. The following Forms in the Civil Rules of Practice, Kerala, would show that it is necessary to put the date therein : Form No.5: Formal parts of plaint or Original Petition (Rule 14) Form No.6: Formal parts of Original Petition when it is not intended to serve any person with notice thereof. (Rule 16) Form No.9: Application to sue or defend, on behalf of numerous parties. (Rule 20) Form No.12 : Vakkalath (Rule 27) Form No.13 : Interlocutory Application (Rule 39) Form No.14 : Affidavit of solemn affirmation (Rule 47) Form No.15 : Certificate when deponent is unacquainted with the language of the affidavit or is blind or illiterate. (Rule 48) Form No.20 : List of witnesses (Rule 69) Form No.35 : Statement of costs and certificate of receipt of Pleader's fee. (Rule 196) Any plaint, written statement, affidavit, interlocutory application or other paper submitted before court which does not contain the date is not liable to be received at all. It is also necessary to ensure that the copies produced along with such papers, which are intended to be served on the opposite side, also bear the date. Every court should ensure that the office of the court does not accept the pleadings, affidavits and applications which do not bear the dates. The Original Petition is disposed of as above.