SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Online)(KER) 61524

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J
NOUSHAD – Appellant
Versus
ARSHAD – Respondent


J U D G M E N T

The order under challenge in this Original Petition (Civil) filed enabling the provisions contained under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is one at Ext.P7 dated 24.11.2017 rendered by the trial court concerned (Munsiff-Magistrate Court, South Paravur), whereby the application filed by the petitioner/fourth defendant in the Original Suit for transposition as additional plaintiff has been rejected by the court below on the ground that the plea for transposition cannot be considered. The plea for transposition has been rejected as per Ext.P7 mainly on the ground that the suit has already been dismissed as not pressed by the original plaintiff and that without reviewing the said order dismissing the suit as not pressed, the plea for transposition cannot be considered.

2. Registry has reported that the conditions in proviso to Rule 51(2) of the Kerala High Court Rules have been duly complied with in respect of service of notice on respondents 3 & 4. Accordingly, it is declared that service of notice on respondents 3 & 4 is duly completed.

3. Heard Sri.Joson Manavalan, learned counsel for the petitioner/fourth defendant, and Sri.R.Mohana Babu, learned counsel for re

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top