Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BASANT BALAJI, J
Tevalappurathu Kudumbayogam S/o Krishnan – Appellant
Versus
Kunjaniyan S/o Kunjupanickan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(BASANT BALAJI, J.)
The petitioners are defendant Nos. 2 to 13 in O.S.No.361 of 2024 on the files of the Munsiff Court, Haripad. Respondents 1 and 2 filed the suit to set aside the decision of the general body held on 1.12.2024, suspending the plaintiffs for 10 years from the primary membership. Along with the suit, an application for an interim prohibitory injunction was also filed as I.A. No.1 of 2024. In the suit, only the members of the elected committee, having charge for one year, were arrayed as defendants. None of the family members, who participated in the general body, which took the decision to suspend the plaintiffs, were arrayed as defendants. To the interim injunction application, a detailed counter affidavit pointing out the non-joinder of necessary parties, was also filed. Immediately, respondents 1 and 2 filed a petition to amend the plaint to convert the suit into one of representative suits under Order 1 Rule 8 CPC. The application was allowed, and the plaintiff was directed to carry out the amendment.
2. The next day, the plaintiff filed an application as I.A. No.7 of 2025 under Order 1 Rule 8 for leave to convert the suit as a representative suit. A det
Compliance with procedural requirements under Order 1 Rule 8 CPC is essential for a suit to be treated as a representative action.
Point of law : Appeal suit - There is nothing mandatory that the appellate court should invariably direct publication of notice whenever a decree in a representative suit is challenged. Merely for th....
The Court found that the applicants had common interest and were entitled to get leave for filing the suit.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that for impleadment under Order 1 Rule 8(3) of C.P.C., the applicants must have the same interest as that of the defendants in a representative su....
Duty is cast on the Court to see that interest of those on whose behalf suit is permitted to be instituted is safeguarded.
Failure to adhere to procedural requirements under Order I Rule 8 of the Civil Procedure Code vitiates judgment, necessitating fresh trial for community representation claims.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
