IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 22ND MAY 2008 / 1ST JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 15210 of 2008(I) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 12/03/2008 IN IA. 420 /2008 IN AS.124/2007 of SUB COURT, PALA .................... PETITIONER: ------------ LYZAMMA JOSEPH, D/O.MATHAI JOSEPH, PLATHOTTATHIL HOUSE, PATHAMPUZHA P.O., POONJAR THEKKEKKARA VILLAGE MEENACHIL TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH ARAYAKUNNEL SRI.VARGHESE PARAMBIL RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE AND LAND RECORDS, GOVT. SECRETARIATE, TRIVANDRUM. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KOTTAYAM. 3. SUPERINTENDENT OF SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS, RE-SURVEY OFFICE, KANJIRAPPALLY. 4. TOMY JACOB, S/O.CHACKO, PLATHOTTATHIL HOUSE, PATHAMPUZHA P.O. POONJAR THEKKEKARA VILLAGE, MEENACHIL TALUK. 5. C.M.PAUL, S/O. MATHAI, CHEMPAKATHINAL HOUSE, -DO- -DO- BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.15210 of 2008 ------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd May, 2008. J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the appellant in A.S.No.124/2007, who is the plaintiff in O.S.No.45/2000, on the file of Munsiff's Court, Erattupetta. The suit was filed against the five respondents. It was dismissed. In the appeal, petitioner filed I.A.No.420/2008 to strike out the names of respondents 4 and 5 from the party array contending that they were ex parte before the court below and he is not seeking any relief against them. Under Ext.P2 order, learned Sub Judge issued notice to respondents which is challenged in this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. The argument of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that under Order I Rule 10 of Code of Civil Procedure, petitioner is entitled to remove any of the parties at any stage of the proceedings, and therefore, even in the appeal, petitioner is entitled to remove respondents 4 and 5 from the party array. It is a matter to be decided by the learned Sub Judge in I.A.No.420/2008. The learned W.P.(C) No.15210/2008 2 Sub Judge did not consider the application on merit and only passed an order directing petitioner to take notice to the respondent in that application. Petitioner is at liberty to address all her arguments before the Sub Judge. The learned Sub Judge shall pass appropriate orders in I.A.No.420/2008 in accordance with law without delay. Petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE nj.