Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

D. KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS versus SOUTH INDIAN PLANTATION WORKERS UNION

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


D. KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS v. SOUTH INDIAN PLANTATION WORKERS UNION - WP(C) No. 3844 of 2007(G) [2007] RD-KL 2995 (9 February 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 3844 of 2007(G)

1. D. KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
... Petitioner

2. MUNIYANDY, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,

3. R. KARUPPASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,

4. P. JAYARAJ, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,

5. VIJAYAKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,

6. A.P. CHARLY, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,

7. P. SURESH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,

8. P. JAYARAJ, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,

9. K.M. IMBANATHAN, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,

10. DEVIAPPAN, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,

11. N. PITCHAI RAWTHER, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,

12. C. KUTTIAPPILLAI, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,

Vs

1. SOUTH INDIAN PLANTATION WORKERS UNION
... Respondent

2. R. KUPPUSWAMY, AGED 82 YEARS,

3. BALASUBRAMANIAN, AGED 86 YEARS,

4. A.K. MONI, AGED 54 YEARS,

For Petitioner :SRI.JOICE GEORGE

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.P.BALACHANDRAN

Dated :09/02/2007

O R D E R

K.P.BALACHANDRAN, J.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C)NO.3844 OF 2007
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Dated this the 9th day of February 2007



JUDGMENT

The petitioners filed I.A.27 of 2007 (Ext.P2) in O.S.119/2004 before the Munsiff's Court, Devikulam to have them impleaded as additional defendants 2 to 13. The purpose of getting impleaded is alleged to be to resist the suit as plaintiffs 2 and 3 in the suit are no more the President and General Secretary of the first plaintiff/Union as a further election was conducted and the petitioners are the present office bearers. Ext.P2 application was dismissed by the Munsiff vide Ext.P4 order assailed in this writ petition. The suit was filed by respondents 1 to 3 against the 4th respondent restraining him from effecting collection of annual subscription from the members of the Union on the ground that the fourth respondent had been expelled from the post of General Secretary of the Union. If plaintiffs 2 and 3 ceased to have any right to proceed with the suit being not office bearers of the first plaintiff/Union the suit ultimately will be dismissed. If at all the petitioners have got any right or cause of action to W.P.(C)NO.3844 OF 2007 2 move against the plaintiffs it is upto them to institute appropriate suit and not to have them got impleaded as additional defendants 2 to 13 in the suit instituted by respondents 1 to 3 to resist the said suit. In the circumstances, Ext.P2 petition was rightly being dismissed by the learned Munsiff vide Ext.P4 order. This writ petition in the circumstances is devoid of merit and is dismissed.

K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JUDGE

jes


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.