IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 12TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 23RD MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 34262 of 2008(D) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN I.A. 4902/08 IN OS.388/1998 of I ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- N.KUMARA PILLAI, S/O.NEELAKANTA PILLAI, SOUMYATHA, K.P.IX/995, A.K.G.NAGAR, KUDAPPANAKKUNNU VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. K.RAJAMMA, D/O.KAMALAKSHY AMMA, RESIDING AT T.C.4/365, POOVANATHUM VILA VEEDU, AMBALAMUKKU, KOWDIAR.P.O, KOWDIAR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. N.BHASKARA PILLAI, S/O.SHRI.NEELAKANTA PILLAI, PUNNAKKAL PUTHEN VEEDU, MANAKKODE, NEDUMANGAD, FROM T.C.4/365, POOVANAKUMBILA VEEDU, AMBALAMMUKKU, KOWDIAR.P.O, KOWDIAR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SUMAN SHARMA, D/O.KAMALAKSHY AMMA, W/O.KAMALESH SHARMA, M/44/3A, SAKET NAGAR, HABILEGANG.P.O, BHOPAL, MADHYA PRADESH, FROM POOVANATHUM VILA VEEDU, AMBALAMMUKKU, KOWDIAR.PO, KOWDIAR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.J.HARIKUMAR FOR R1 & 2 SRI.HARIKUMAR.S. FOR R1 & 2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC 34262/08 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.NO.388/98 FILED BEFORE THE 1ST ADDITIONAL SUBORDINATE JUDGE'S COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT IN O.S.NO.388/98. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE IMPLEADING PETITION, I.A.NO.4902/08 IN O.S.NO.388/98 EXT.P4: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24.9.2008 IN I.A.NO.4902/08 IN O.S.NO.388/98 OF THE 1ST ADDITIONAL SUB COURT. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.34262 of 2008 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of February, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner, who is the plaintiff in O.S.No.388 of 1988 on the file of the court of the I Additional Subordinate Judge, Thiruvananthapuram challenges in this Writ Petition Ext.P4 order dated 24th September 2008 by which the court below dismissed the application to implead additional defendants. The court below dismissed the application on the ground that the additional defendants sought to be impleaded are pendente lite transferees and it is not necessary to implead them. The learned counsel submits that this statement made in the order is erroneous. Even as per the contention of the defendants, the persons who are now sought to be impleaded are transferees before the institution of the suit. 2. However, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the suit itself was dismissed for default on 17.11.2008. Since the suit is dismissed for default, the Writ Petition challenging the Interlocutory Order in the suit would not WPC No. 34262/2008 2 be maintainable. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. In case the suit is restored to file, the petitioner would be free to challenge Ext.P4 order notwithstanding the dismissal of this Writ petition. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl