BIJO ISSAC Vs. T.K.SUBASH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by Exts P5 and P6 orders passed in IA Nos.2 and 3 of 2021 in OS No.18/2017 by the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Chavakkad, the plaintiff has filed the original petition. The respondent is the defendant in the suit.

(2.) The antecedent facts leading to Exts P5 and P6 orders, in a nutshell, are: the petitioner has filed the suit against the respondent for a decree for recovery of money on the strength of a cheque. The respondent has denied the allegations in the plaint through Ext P2 written statement. During the cross-examination of the respondent, he denied the writings on the cheque other than his signature. Therefore, the petitioner filed IA No.2/2021 (Ext P3) and IA No.3/2021 (Ext P4), to send the cheque for expert opinion and to reopen the evidence in the suit, respectively. The court below, by the impugned Exts P5 and P6 orders, dismissed Exts P3 and P4 applications. Exts P5 and P6 orders are patently wrong and unsustainable in law. Hence the original petition.

(3.) Heard; Sri.R Bindu Sasthamangalam, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.C.G Preetha, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.