IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 1ST AUGUST 2011 / 10TH SRAVANA 1933 OP(C).No. 2477 of 2011(O) -------------------------------- IA 7223/2010 IN OS.755/2010 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,THRISSUR .................... PETITIONER -------------- PREMKUMAR, S/O.KANJIRAPARAMBIL THAMI, MUTHUVATTOOR DESOM, GURUVAYOOR VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, TRISSUR DISTRICT.PIN - 680 506. BY ADVS. SRI.VAKKOM N.VIJAYAN SMT.V.RENJU SRI.P.ANIYAN SMT.M.A.RAMITHA RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. SANTHAKUMARI, W/O.POOVATHINKAL BHARATHAN, CHOONDAL (P.O),PUDUSSERY DESOM, CHEMMAMTHATTA VILLAGE, THALAPPILLY TALUK, TRISSUR PIN - 680502. 2. VIJAYAN, S/O.KANJIRAPARAMBIL THAMI, THIRUVENKIDAM DESOM, GURUVAYOOR VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, TRISSUR PIN - 680101. 3. MALATHIBHAI, W/O.VENUGOPALAN, DEVI NIVAS SANTHI NAGAR, AYYANTHOLE VILLAGE, -DO- DESOM, TRISSUR TALUK, PIN - 680003. 4. RAVEENDRANATHAN, S/O.KANJIRAPARAMBIL THAMI, KOVILAKAMPARAMBIL, AYYANTHOLE VILLAGE, -DO- DESOM, TRISSUR TALUK, PIN - 680003. 5. JAYAPRAKASH, AGED 64 YEARS, S/O.KANJIRAPARAMBIL KUNJIKRISHNAN, RESIDING AT H.NO.127/6(104/23), PUNNA DESOM,MANATHALA AMSOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, TRISSUR, PIN - 680506. 6. LAKSHMI, AGED 60 YEARS, W/O.KANJIRAPARAMBIL JAYAPRAKASH, -DO- -DO- 7. SHARAJ, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O.KANJIRAPARAMBIL JAYAPRAKASH, -DO- -DO- THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs O.P.(C). NO. 2477/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF OS.NO.755/2010 FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN THE SUB COURT, THRISSUR. P2: COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT IN OS. NO.755/2010 FILED BY PETITIONER. P3: COPY OF THE IMPLEADING PETITION TOGETHER WITH THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS 5 TO 7 AS IA. NO.7223/2010 IN O.S. NO.755/2010. P4: COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE IMPLEADING PETITION. P5: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10/06/2011 IN I.A. NO.7223/2010 IN O.S. NO.755/2010 IN THE COURT OF THE IIND ADDITIONAL SUB JUDGE THRISSUR. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== O.P(C) No.2477 of 2011 ==================================== Dated this the 01st day of August, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a defendant in O.S. No.755 of 2010 of the court of learned Sub Judge, Thrissur. He is aggrieved by Ext.P5, order on I.A. No.7223 of 2010 impleading respondents 5 to 7 as additional defendants in the suit. First respondent filed O.S. No.755 of 2010 for partition of the suit property claiming that property belonged to the petitioner and respondents 1 to 4 alone having devolved on them on the death of their father, Thampi. Petitioner filed Ext.P2, written statement. While so, respondents 5 to 7 filed I.A. No.7223 of 2010 for their impleadment contending that they have right over the said property or part of it as the case may be. That application was opposed but learned Sub Judge allowed the same as per the impugned order. 2. Learned counsel contended that the only reason for court allowing I.A. No.7223 of 2010 is that in the counter claim made by respondents 5 to 7 in O.S. No.436 of 2003 they have made a claim over the property in question. According to the learned counsel even if such a counter claim is made that does not O.P(C) No.2477 of 2011 -: 2 :- enable respondents to get impleaded in O.S. No.755 of 2010 for proper adjudication of the dispute. 3. I am afraid, I am unable to accept that contention. Petitioner filed O.S. No.436 of 2003 in the court of learned Munsiff, Chavakkad for a decree for injunction against respondents 5 to 7. Respondents 5 to 7 filed written statement in that suit contending that they are residing in the building in the property involved and claiming right over it. In such a situation even if not as necessary parties, presence of respondents 5 to 7 as proper parties in O.S. No.755 of 2010 was required for an effective adjudication of the dispute involved. Viewed in that line I do not find reason to interfere with the impugned order. Original Petition fails and is dismissed. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv