D.Suresh Babu vs The Chief Passport Officer on 3 September, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 26218 of 2008(U)


1. D.SURESH BABU, MURALEE SADANAM,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE CHIEF PASSPORT OFFICER,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.G.ARUN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

 Dated :03/09/2008

 O R D E R
                 M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.

                   -------------------------------

                    W.P.(C) No.26218 of 2008

                   -------------------------------

               Dated this the 3rd September, 2008.

                         J U D G M E N T

This petition is filed under Article 227 of the

Constitution of India contending that Munsiff, Nedumangad, did

not receive Ext.P4 plaint, when presented before that court on

21.8.2008. A direction is sought to the Munsiff to accept Ext.P4

plaint and Ext.P5 petition.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and

learned Assistant Solicitor General were heard.

3. When a plaint is presented before the Court, the

Court is bound to receive the same. If there is a defect, the

defect is to be noted and is to be returned to the plaintiff to cure

the defect. If the plaint is liable to be rejected on any of the

grounds, provided under Order VII of Code of Civil Procedure, the

Court is competent to reject the plaint also. Therefore, when the

plaint is presented, the Court shall either receive the plaint and

W.P.(C) No.26218 of 2008

2

number the same, or return the same to cure the defect, noting

the defect, if any, or reject the plaint, as provided under the Code

of Civil Procedure. The Court cannot return the plaint without

any endorsement. Munsiff, Nedumangad, is directed to receive

the plaint, if presented by the petitioner, and proceed with the

same, in accordance with law, either numbering the same or

returning the same for curing the defect, or rejecting the plaint

itself.

The writ petition is disposed as above.

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,
JUDGE

nj.