IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH THURSDAY, THE 24TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 18474 of 2010(O) -------------------------- RCP.44/2001 of PRL.M.C.KOZHIKODE-I .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. SUDHEER BABU, S/O.SREENIVASAN AGED 52 YEARS, CHOROTUU HOUSE KACHERI AMSOM,DESOM KOZHIKODE TALUK, REPRESENTED BY HIS NEXT FRIEND KARUNAKARAN, S/O.BALAN,ALEMPETTA HOUSE, WEST HILL CALICUT 673 005. 2. KARUNAKARAN, S/O.BALAN ALEMPETTA HOUSE, WEST HILL, CALICUT 673005. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SURESH, S/O.THEKKAYIL SURENDRA RAJAN KALATHILKUNNU AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. 2. M.N.BALAKRISHNAN, S/O.RAMUNNI NAIR MELANEDULLI HOUSE, P.O.PERUMANNA PERUMANNA AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE. 3. CHEROTTU VIJAYAKUMAR, S/O.SREENIVASAN KACHERI AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. 4. JAYAKUMAR, S/O.KRISHNAN NAMBOOTHIRI J.S STREET, 7/267, COIR BUSINESS COURT ROAD, NAGARAM AMSOM DESOM,KOZHIKODE TALUK. 5. KUZHIPPILLI VEETTATH RADHA, D/O.THEKKEYIL ACHUTHAN, 1/128 RAMALINGAM ROAD COIMBATORE. 6. CHEROTTY PADMINI, W/O.SREENIVASAN CHEROTTU HOUSE, KACHERI AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. W.P.(C) No.18474 of 2010 : 2 : 7. CHEROTTU SATHEESH, S/O.SREENIVASAN CHEROTTU HOUSE, KACHERI AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. 8. ANITHA, D/O.SREENIVASAN CHEROTTU HOUSE, KACHERI AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.V.V.SURENDRAN FOR R1 & 2 BY ADV. SRI.P.A.HARISH FOR R1 & 2 BY ADV. SMT.RESMI NANDANAN FOR R1 & 2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C) NO.18474 OF 2010 EXT.P1 A COPY OF THE PLAINT FILED BY THE FIRST PETITIONER THROUGH HIS NEXT FRIEND BEFORE THE MUNSIFF - I, KOZHIKODE DATED 24.5.2010. EXT.P2 A COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27.5.2010 OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF - I, KOZHIKODE. EXT.P3 A COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BEFORE THE MUNSIFF - I, KOZHIKODE. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. V.CHITAMBARESH, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.18474 of 2010 ------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T Ext.P2 order, whereby an application purporting to be one filed under Order XXXII Rule (15) of Civil Procedure Code for permission to represent the first plaintiff by a next friend, is dismissed has been challenged in this writ petition. The suit itself is one for setting aside an order of eviction passed concurrently by three courts in respect of a non-residential premises. It is submitted at the Bar that delivery was effected as early as on 23.6.2010 and that the first writ petitioner is one of the legal heirs of the tenant. 2. The second plaintiff claiming to be the next friend contended that the first plaintiff was under treatment under various doctors for the past over 35 years. The alleged mental illness is 'schizophrenia' wherein there is a failure of perception for a person in lucid intervals. The court below had occasion to interact with the first plaintiff in person. Ext.P2 order reads as follows:- “2. 1st plaintiff present. Enquiry as W.P.(C) No.18474 OF 2010 2 contemplated under Rule 15 of Order 32 is carried out. Several questions were put to the 1st plaintiff and he gave very rational answers. He has even given answer to the effect that he has been suffering from mental illness but is not so now and that there is no problem now.” It is only the subjective satisfaction of the court which matters under Order XXXII Rule 15 of Code of Civil Procedure in deciding as to whether permission has to be granted. 3. The counsel for the petitioners relies on Syed Hassan v. Chirutha (1987(2) KLT 242), Cleetus v. South Indian Bank (2007 (3) KLT 868) and Raveendran v. Sobhana (2008 (1) KLT 488) and contends that the first plaintiff should have been referred to a medical board before deciding on the application under Order XXXII Rule 15 of CPC. I disagree. The court below was satisfied that the first petitioner/first plaintiff does not suffer from any legal infirmity to espouse his cause. Moreover the 'next friend' has changed and the second petitioner is a person different from the second plaintiff in the suit. There is W.P.(C) No.18474 OF 2010 3 no error of jurisdiction in Ext.P2 order. The writ petition stands dismissed. V.CHITAMBARESH, Judge. nj. V.CHITAMBARESH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 18474 of 2010 JUDGMENT Dated:- 24th November, 2011 --------------------------------------