MAHENDRANATH Vs. ABDUL KAREEM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The original petition is filed to set aside Ext P7 order passed in I.A.No.4278/2016 in O.S.No.916/2011 of the Court of the Additional Subordinate Judge - I, Thiruvananthapuram.

(2.) The petitioner is the plaintiff in the above suit filed against the respondent for a decree for specific performance. The suit was dismissed for default on 30/7/2015. The petitioner had filed Exts.P2 and P3 applications to restore the suit and to condone the delay in filing Ext.P2. The Court of the Additional Subordinate Judge - II, Thiruvananthapuram, by Ext.P4 order restored the suit. The parties were referred for mediation, and their disputes were settled as per Ext.P5 mediation report. Hence the petitioner is entitled to get refund of the entire court fee of Rs.3,30,400.00. By an inadvertent mistake, Exts.P2 and P3 applications were filed and Ext.P4 order was passed by the IInd Additional Subordinate Judge instead of the Ist Additional Subordinate Judge. Therefore, the petitioner filed Ext.P6 application before the Ist Additional Subordinate Judge's Court to accept the mediation report, decree the suit and order the refund of the court fee. But, the Ist Additional Subordinate Judge, by the impugned Ext.P7 order, dismissed Ext.P6 application holding that as Exts.P2 and P3 applications were filed before a wrong court, Ext.P4 order is non-est and, therefore, the mediation report cannot be accepted, and the suit cannot be decreed. Ext P7 is patently wrong and erroneous. Hence, the original petition.

(3.) Heard; Sri. K. Mohanakannan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Even though notice was served on the respondent, there is no appearance for him.