VAREED Vs. SUKUMARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One Sreedharan, son of Thathanath Kalliani Amma, Pazhanji Village. Talappilly Taluk (hereinafter referred to as the original plaintiff) filed O.S. No. 354 of 1980 in the Munsiff's Court, Chavakkad, for recovery of possession of a building with arrears of rent. By judgment dated 2-2-1982 the suit was decreed in his favour. The defendant who hereinafter referred to as the judgment debtor, filed A.S. No. 88 of 1982 before the District Court. Trichur challenging that judgment and decree. The notice to the respondent therein, (original plaintiff) seems to have been returned unserved. Subsequently respondent's notice was published in the 'Mathrubhoomi' daily, Seeing the publication the wife, minor children and mother of the original plaintiff filed I.A 338 of 1983 before the appellate court to implead them as additional respondents in the appeal. In the affidavit in support of that application filed by the wife of the original plaintiff it was stated that the original plaintiff was employed in Military. From 15-1-1982 to 29-1-1982 he was on casual leave and came home on leave. On 8-2-1982 he proceeded to Srinagar by K.K. Express from Trichur. Thereafter he was not heard of. By letter dated 2-3-1982 the Military Headquarters informed them that he did not report for duty after leave. They corresponded with the military authorities and also inserted a publication in the Malayalam Express with a photograph of the original plaintiff. Enquiries were also made through police authorities. However, he could not be traced. The said affidavit was filed on 18-2-1983. The court marked the documents produced along with the I. A. and allowed the application observing as follows:

(2.) Learned counsel for the judgment debtor placed considerable reliance on the following observation of this Court reported in Raghava Panicker v. Kesavan ( 1961 KLT 582 ):

(3.) On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents referred to the following observation of the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir Gulam Nabi Seh v. Gaffer Wagey (AIR 1983 J. & K. 67):