IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 8152 of 2009(O)
1. P.M.CHANDRAN, AGED 56 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. PRESIDENT, N.S.S.KARAYOGAM NO.1001,
... Respondent
2. M.G.VIJAYAKUMAR, AGED 55 YEARS,
3. A.G.NARAYANA PILLAI, AGED 49 YEARS,
4. K.PRADHEEP KUMAR, AGED 46 YEARS,
5. KUNJAN PILLAI, AGED 76 YEARS,
6. GOPALAKRISHNA VARIYAR, AGED 65 YEARS,
7. A.R.RAMADAS, AGED 55 YEARS,
8. S.VISWAMBARAN PILLAI, AGED 49 YEARS,
9. S.BALAKRISHNA PILLAI, AGED 70 YEARS,
10. K.VIJAYA KRISHNAN, AGED 57 YEARS,
11. K.BALAKRISHNA PILLAI, AGED 63 YEARS,
For Petitioner :SRI.M.NARENDRA KUMAR
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :13/03/2009
O R D E R
K.T.SANKARAN, J.
------------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) NO. 8152 OF 2009 O
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 13th March, 2009
JUDGMENT
The writ petitioner is the defendant in O.S.No.46 of 1999, on the file
of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Kottarakkara. In the written
statement, the defendant stated that the suit is not maintainable. On
20.2.2009, the defendant filed an application to amend the written
statement to incorporate a contention that the first plaintiff, being an
unregistered association of members and being not a legal entity, cannot
sue or be sued and that the plaintiffs cannot claim settlement of accounts
as against the defendant. The court below dismissed the application as
highly belated. The evidence in the case is almost over. The application
was filed at that stage. It cannot be said that the court below has
committed any error in dismissing the application.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in the written
statement itself the defendant has raised a contention that the suit is not
maintainable and what is sought to be done is to give a gloss to the
contention and to provide more particulars. He submitted that it is a
question of law and it can be raised at any point of time. If the question
of maintainability of the suit is a pure question of law, even without any
W.P.(C) NO.8152 OF 2009
:: 2 ::
amendment of the written statement, the defendant could raise that
contention. For that purpose, there need not be any amendment. I do
not think, it is proper to interfere with the order passed by the court below.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed.
(K.T.SANKARAN)
Judge
ahz/