IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 17632 of 2008(Y)
1. K.SASIDHARAN, S/O.KESAVAN, AGED 65,
... Petitioner
2. V.HARIHARAN, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, AGED 61,
3. N.VINODLAL, S/O.KOCHUNARAYANAN, AGED 47,
4. S.BABU RAJENDRAPRASAD, S/O.SIVADASAN,
5. S.JAYASREE, D/O.SATHYABHAMA, AGED 53,
6. N.VIJAYAN, S/O.NARAYANAN, AGED 52,
7. B.RADHAKRISHNAN, S/O.BALAKRISHNAN,
8. R.SUDEVAN, S/O.RAMANKUTTY, AGED 62,
9. M.A.RASHEED, S/O.ABDUL MUTHALIB,
10. N.CHANDRAKALADHARAN, SURAJ NIVAS,
Vs
1. N.RAVEENDRAN, SREE RAGAM,
... Respondent
2. V.SANTHAKUMARI, SREE RAGAM,
3. V.SANTHAKUMAR, DEVA PREETHI,
4. N.SIVADASAN, USHAS, THAZHAM MIDDLE,
5. S.BIJU, USHAS, THAZHAM MIDDLE,
6. N.RETNAKARAN, REENA BHAVAN,
7. N.SOMARAJAN, GULNAR, PARIPPALLY P.O.
8. SUPRABHA SOMARAJAN, GULNAR,
9. M.THULASEEDHARAN, PUTHENVEEDU,
10. K.R.SOMAN, PADINJATTVUVILA VEEDU,
11. P.SELVARAJAN, P.K.BHAVAN,
12. K.MONY, MANJARI, KARAMKODU P.O.
13. K.T.RAVEENDRAN NAIR, SEETHAL,
14. P.S.SUNILKUMAR, PRINCIPAL,
15. AJAY SASIDHARAN, TEACHER, SREENIKETAN
16. S.SINDHU, SREENIKETAN, CENTRAL SCHOOL,
17. SREENIKETAN CENTRE FOR SOCIAL
18. MANAGING COMMITTEE OF SREENIKETAN
19. NIRMALA BOSE, BINULAND,
20. SREENIKETHAN CENTRAL SCHOOL,
21. V.RAMACHANDRAN, RINTA VILLA, PAMPURAM,
22. N.MURUKESHAN, S/O.NARAYANAN,
For Petitioner :SRI.S.V.RAJAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
Dated :13/06/2008
O R D E R
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.
-------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.17632 of 2008
-------------------------------
Dated this the 13th June, 2008.
J U D G M E N T
Petitioners are the plaintiffs in O.S.No.132 of 1999, on
the file of the Munsiff Court, Paravur. They filed I.A.No.37/2008, an
application under Rule 17 of Order VI of Code of Civil Procedure, for
permission to amend the plaint. Petition was dismissed under Ext.P3
order. It is challenged in this writ petition filed under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners
was heard. The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners is
that for an effective decree to be passed in the suit and for resolving
the dispute between the parties, learned Munsiff should have allowed
the application.
On hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners and
on going through Ext.P3 order, I do not find any reason to interfere
W.P.(C) No.17632 of 2008
2
with Ext.P3 order in exercise of the powers of this Court under Article
227 of the Constitution of India, as there is no illegality or irregularity
warranting interference. Petition is dismissed.
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,
JUDGE
nj.