Kerala High Court
V.K.Sasi vs Kunjamma on 18 March, 2022
OP(C) NO. 2256 OF 2021
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
FRIDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 27TH PHALGUNA, 1943
OP(C) NO. 2256 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OS 76/2013 OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
COURT, KOCHI
PETITIONER/1ST DEFENDANT:
V.K.SASI
AGED 62 YEARS
S/O. KANNAN, VIPPITHARA HOUSE,
PUTHUVYPE P. O., ERNAKULAM - 682508.
BY ADVS.
P.V.ANOOP
PHIJO PRADEESH PHILIP
M.P.PRIYESHKUMAR
K.V.SREERAJ
RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFFS/DEFENDANTS 2 TO 7:
1 KUNJAMMA
AGED 74 YEARS
W/O. SUBRAMANIAN, CHARAKKAT HOUSE,
PUTHUVYPU VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK - 682508.
2 SULOCHANA
AGED 64 YEARS
D/O. KANNAN AND W/O. GANGADHARAN,
KOCHIYAMPARAMB HOUSE, KAITHARAM,
KOTTUVALLY VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM - 683519.
3 VILASINI
AGED 62 YEARS
D/O. KANNAN, KOCHUTHARA HOUSE,
VALLARPADAM, ERNAKULAM - 682504.
4 INDIRA DEVI K. C.
AGED 65 YEARS
W/O. LATE KUMARAN, VIPPITHARA HOUSE,
PUTHUVYPE VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK - 682 508.
OP(C) NO. 2256 OF 2021
2
5 MINIMOL
AGED 44 YEARS
D/O. LATE KUMARAN, VIPPITHARA HOUSE,
PUTHUVYPE VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK - 682 508.
6 MANOJKUMAR
AGED 43 YEARS
S/O. LATE KUMARAN, VIPPITHARA HOUSE,
PUTHUVYPE VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK - 682 508.
7 MEENAMOL
AGED 40 YEARS
D/O. LATE KUMARAN, VIPPITHARA HOUSE,
PUTHUVYPE VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK - 682 508.
8 SAROJINI V. KUNJUMON
AGED 55 YEARS
W/O. LATE KUNJUMON, VIPPITHARA HOUSE,
PUTHUVYPE VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK - 682 508.
9 KEDAR V. KUNJUMON
AGED 14 YEARS
S/O. LATE KUNJUMON, VIPPITHARA HOUSE,
PUTHUVYPE VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK - 682 508.
REPRESENTED BY MOTHER SAROJINI V. KUNJUMON,
AGED 55 YEARS, W/O. LATE KUNJUMON,
VIPPITHARA HOUSE, PUTHUVYPE VILLAGE,
KOCHI TALUK - 682 508.
10 RAJEEVAN
AGED 54 YEARS
S/O. KUNJAMMA, CHARANKATTU HOUSE,
PUTHUVYPE, OCHANTHURUTH P. O., KOCHI - 682 508.
11 SHAIJU SURESH
AGED 49 YEARS
D/O. KUNJAMMA, CHARANKATTU HOUSE, PUTHUVYPE,
OCHANTHURUTH P. O., KOCHI - 682 508.
12 BALASUBRAMANIYAN
AGED 19 YEARS
S/O. MURALEEDHARAN,
CHARANKATTU HOUSE,
PUTHUVYPE, OCHANTHURUTH P. O.,
KOCHI - 682 508.
OP(C) NO. 2256 OF 2021
3
13 ALEENA
AGED 16 YEARS
D/O. MURALEEDHARAN,
CHARANKATTU HOUSE,
PUTHUVYPE, OCHANTHURUTH P. O., KOCHI - 682 508,
REPRESENTED BY HER NEXT FRIEND RAJEEVAN,
AGED 54 YEARS, S/O. KUNJAMMA,
CHARANKATTU HOUSE, PUTHUVYPE,
OCHANTHURUTH P. O., KOCHI - 682 508.
14 SREEJITH
AGED 35 YEARS
S/O. GOPINATHAN AND VILASINI,
KOCHUTHARAVEEDU, VALLARPADAM P. O.,
KOCHI - 682504.
15 SREELA
AGED 38 YEARS
D/O. VILASINI,
CHILLITHARAVEEDU,
PERUMPADANNA, NORTH PARAVUR - 683513.
16 SHOBHA
AGED 56 YEARS
W/O. KUNJAPPAN, VIPPITHARA HOUSE,
PUTHUVYPE VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK - 682 508.
17 SRUTHY
AGED 32 YEARS
D/O. KUNJAPPAN, VIPPITHARA HOUSE,
PUTHUVYPE VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK - 682 508.
18 SOORYA
AGED 30 YEARS
D/O. KUNJAPPAN, VIPPITHARA HOUSE,
PUTHUVYPE VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK - 682 508.
19 NATESAN
AGED 68 YEARS
S/O. KUNJAN, AMMANGATTUTHARA,
PUTHUVYPE VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK - 682 508.
20 CHANDRAMATHI
AGED 66 YEARS
W/O. SUTHAN, AMMANGATTUTHARA,
THANIPPADATH, NORTH PARAVUR,
ERNAKULAM - 683513.
OP(C) NO. 2256 OF 2021
4
21 GOPI
AGED 64 YEARS
S/O. SUTHAN, AMMANGATTUTHARA,
PUTHUVYPE VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK - 682 508.
BY ADV G.KRISHNAKUMAR
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
18.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP(C) NO. 2256 OF 2021
5
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 18th day of March, 2022
This is an Original Petition filed under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India, the petitioner, who originally arrayed as
first defendant in O.S.No.76/2013 on the files of the Munsiff
Court, Kochi. The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P5 order
passed in a memo filed by the plaintiff not pressing the relief
canvassed against the first defendant.
2. Though the order has been passed in a memo filed
by the plaintiff, the master of the suit, the learned Munsiff had
given reasons for accepting the not press memo filed by the
plaintiff.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner/the first
defendant would submit that the first defendant is a necessary
party and therefore, the order passed by the learned Munsiff
not pressing the relief against the first defendant as opted by
the plaintiff is erroneous. He submitted further that he has filed
another Suit, viz, O.S.No.277/2021.
OP(C) NO. 2256 OF 2021
4. Here, the plaintiff does not want to continue Suit
against the first defendant. Therefore, plaintiff filed a petition
not pressing any relief against first defendant. That was
permitted as per the impugned order. In fact, the said order is
not at all erroneous. A defendant cannot insist the plaintiff shall
sue against him, despite the plaintiff, Dominus litis, decided to
not proceed against him. Therefore, the order impugned need
not be interfered and the same is confirmed.
It is made clear that if the petitioner has any grievance,
otherwise, to be addressed, he can opt the relief as provided
under law or else in the Suit admittedly filed by him.
This Original Petition stands disposed of.
Registry shall forward a copy of this judgment to the court
below concerned, within seven days, for information and
compliance.
Sd/-
A. BADHARUDEEN
JUDGE
nkr
OP(C) NO. 2256 OF 2021
APPENDIX OF OP(C) 2256/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE AMENDED PLAINT IN
O.S.NO.76 OF 2013 ON THE FILE OF MUNSIFF
COURT, KOCHI.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED
BY THE PETITIONER DATED 22.05.2013.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.09.2019 IN
IA NOS.966/2019 AND 967/2019 IN
O.S.NO.76/2013 PASSED BY THE MUNSIFF
COURT, KOCHI.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL WRITTEN
STATEMENT IN O.S.76/2013 DATED 20.01.2020
FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE MUNSIFF
COURT, KOCHI.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10.11.2021
PASSED BY THE MUNSIFF COURT, KOCHI.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.1975/1989
DATED 26.09.1989 OF SRO, NJARAKKAL.
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH AND DESCRIPTION OF
THE PROPERTY MENTIONED AS PLAINT A TO F
SCHEDULE PROPERTIES IN EXHIBIT P1 PLAINT.
