ROYAL AGENCIES Vs. KAVALAKKATTU TRADERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The issues in these two Original Petitions (Civil) are common and the petitioner/defendant in both the cases are the same. The respondent/ plaintiff in one case is the sister concern of the other. In view of these aspects, both these cases are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) The prayer in O.P(C).No. 3676/2017 is as follows:

(3.) The respondent/plaintiff in O.P(C).No.3676/2017 had filed O.S.No.594/2013, which is a suit for recovery of money to realize Rs. 1,38,570/- from the petitioner/defendant. The plaint schedule property was attached by the order dated 3.12.2013 rendered on I.A.No.1889/2013 in O.S.No.594/2013. The respondent/plaintiff had filed proof affidavit dated 10.2.2016 in lieu of chief examination through his power-of-attorney. Cross examination was conducted on 26.2.2016. The petitioner/defendant had filed I.A.No. 1099/2017 to reopen his evidence, which was allowed by the court below. The petitioner/defendant had also filed Ext.P-1 I.A.No. 1432/2017 in O.S.No. 594/2013 to discard the evidence already tendered and to accept the second proof affidavit dated 23.8.2017. On 24.10.2017, Ext.P-3 counter affidavit to Ext.P-1 I.A. was served on the opposite counsel and the same was filed on the same day and the trial court had heard the above I.A. on 6.11.2017 and had passed the impugned Ext.P-4 order dated 16.11.2017 allowing the prayer in Ext.P-1 I.A. Ext.P-4 in O.P(C).No. 3676/2017 reads as follows:ORDER