JUDGMENT :

Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.

1. A question of maintainability has been raised by the respondent nos. 2 to 4, on the ground that the registered society, not being an independent juristic entity, cannot maintain the writ petition in its own name.

2. There is a reason why this court is not of the opinion that the writ can be decided on a question of law only, even if the principle embodied in Order XIV Rule 2 (2) (b) of the Code of Civil Procedure is applied.

3. First, both parties have argued the matter at length, on all questions of fact and law involved in the case, including the issue of maintainability. Hence, it would be an injustice to restrict judgment on the maintainability issue alone.

4. Secondly, in the facts of the case, a question arises as to whether the defect is curable, to decide which, the court has to enter into several questions of fact, such as, who has affirmed the writ, whether she/he was authorised in law to sue on behalf of the society, and several allied facts. Hence, it cannot be said strictly that the issue is a pure question of law.

5. However, the issue of maintainability is taken up first for adjudication. Learned counsel for the respondent nos.2 t