The court established that the determination of a suit's maintainability should occur during trial rather than at a preliminary stage.

J U D G M E N T

This original petition is for a direction to the learned Munsiff, Pala to decide maintainability of O.S.No.121 of 2010.

2. Learned counsel submits that on account of conduct of election during pendancy of the suit, reliefs prayed for in the suit has become infructuous. It is also contended that byelaw provides for preferring appeal to the appropriate authority and since plaintiffs have got other efficacious remedy, the suit is not maintainable.

3. In Ext.P6, judgment dated 14.12.2012 in O.P(C).No.4354 of 2012, this Court directed the learned Munsiff to dispose of I.A.No.1147 of 2012. This Court also directed that learned Munsiff shall make every endeavour to dispose of the suit before the Court closes for summer vacation this year.

4. Relief (a) prayed for in the suit is a declaration that steps taken by defendants 1, 2 and 10 to conduct election proposed to be held on 18.04.2010 are not valid, defendants 2 to 9 are not validly elected and for other reliefs. Question whether even if election is conducted during pendancy of the suit, whether if ultimately relief (a) prayed for is granted by the learned Munsiff, what would be the effect of that on the election conducted during pendancy of the suit is a matter which the trial court has to decide.

5. Having regard to the above, I am not inclined to think that maintainability could be decided at this stage. Moreover, in Ext.P6, judgment this Court has directed disposal of the suit, as far as possible before the Court closes for summer vacation, this year.

6. In that view of the matter, I do not find reason to interfere. Maintainability of the suit and sustainability of reliefs prayed for could be decided while deciding the suit.

This original petition is disposed of as above.