IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH JANUARY 2008 / 26TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 3955 of 2005(U) ------------------------- I.A.923/2004 IN OS.78/2004 of SUB COURT, PALA .................... PETITIONER: ------------ GEORGE JOSEPH, S/O.OUSEPH, AGED 52, CHERADY VALIYA VEETTIL, THALAPPALAM VILLAGE, PLASSANAL P.O., KOTTAYAMA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JOHNSON MANAYANI SRI.PIUS K NEDUMGATTU RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM. 2. TAHSILDAR (RR), MEENACHIL, PALAI. 3. VILLAGE OFFICER, POONJAR, THEKKEKARA VILLAGE. 4. T.C.SEBASTIAN, S/O.CHACKO, THAYYIL, POONJAR, THEKKEKARA VILLAGE AND KARA. 5. STANLEY, S/O.T.M.MATHEW, THATTAMPARAMBIL, TEEKOY KARA AND VILLAGE. 6. TESSY STANLEY, OF DO.DO. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGEKUTTY MATHEW FOR R5 & R6 G.P.SRI.SHYSON P. MANGAZHA FOR R1 TO R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- P1: True copy of the plaint Ino.s.78/2004 of Sub Court, Palai. P2: True copy of the impleading petition submitted by the petitioner in Ext.P1. P3: True copy of the objection filed by the respondents 5 and 6 to the Ext.P2 petition. P4: True copy of the order in I.A.No.923/2004 in O.S.No.78/2004 dt. 17- 11-2004 of the Sub Court, Thodupuzha. Pius C. Kuriakose, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 3955 of 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 16th day of January,2008 JUDGMENT This writ petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing Ext.P4 order of the Sub Court, Palai. The supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 can be exercised only in exceptional circumstances. In Ext.P4 what the learned Judge has observed that the cause of action relied on the petitioner and the relief sought to be gained by the petitioner if he is impleaded in the suit is entirely different from the cause of action and the relief relating to the suit. It is always open to the petitioner to institute fresh suit on the basis of the cause of action alleged by him. 2. In the circumstances, challenge under Ext.P4 is repelled. The writ petition is dismissed, accordingly. Pius C. Kuriakose, Judge. mn. 2