CONSTANTINE K L Vs. BRUSS FOODS B V

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The original petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:

(2.) Suit claims were resisted by defendants 1 and 2/the petitioners herein filing a written statement disputing the case of the plaintiff. The defendants contended that the 1st defendant never entered into any contract with the plaintiff for supply of yellowfin tuna fish to M/s. Conservas Isabel De Galicia SL, Spain and that neither the 1st defendant nor the 2nd defendant effected any shipment to M/s. Conservas Isabel De Galicia SL, Spain against the alleged purchase contracts with the plaintiff.

(3.) The trial of the above case is now in progress. After examination of the Managing Director of the plaintiff as P.W. 1 in the case, the plaintiff moved Ext.P4 application for a direction to the defendants to produce the documents listed in that petition. The defendants resisted that application filing Ext.P5 objections. The learned Sub Judge negativing the objections raised by the defendants vide Ext.P6 order directed them to produce the documents listed in Ext.P4 petition or to file an affidavit. Ext.P6 order is challenged as unsustainable and illegal by the petitioners/defendants invoking the visitorial jurisdiction vested with this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.