IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 29TH JANUARY 2008 / 9TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 3439 of 2008(H) ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN IA 6/2008 IN OS.31/2000 of SUB COURT, MANJERI .................... PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. KUNHIKADIYUMMA, W/O. KUNHALAVI KURIKKAL, PAYYANAD, ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. AHAMMED KURIKKAL, S/O. KUNHALAVI KURIKKAL, PAYYANAD, ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DIST. 3. HASSAN KURIKKAL, S/O.KUNHALAVI KURIKKAL, PAYYANAD, ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 4. BEEPATHU, D/O. KUNHALAVI KURIKKAL, PAYYANAD, ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 5. RAMLA, D/O. KUNHALAVI KURIKKAL, PAYYANAD, ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. MANCHERI MUSTAFA KURIKKAL, S/O. AHAMMED KURIKKAL, PAYYANAD, ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. MUHAMMED KURIKKAL, S/O.AHAMMED KURIKKAL, PAYYANAD, ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. ISHAK KURIKKAL, S/O. AHAMMED KURIKKAL, PAYYANAD, ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 4. JAMEELA, W/O. KARALIKKADAN MOOSA MASTER, PAYYANAD, ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. Kss ..2/- ...2..... WPC.NO.3439/2008 H 5. SUBAIDA, W/O. MANKARATHODI IBRAHIM, MUNDUPARAMBU, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 6. PATHUMMA, W/O. MANKARATHODI MUHAMMED, PULPATTA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 7. HASEENA, W/O.KOOTHRADAN SALIM, MALAPPURAM, KATTUNGAL, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 8. AMINAKUTTY UMMA, W/O.AHAMMED KURIKKA, MANCHERI HOUSE, PAYYANAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 9. BABITHA, W/O.LATE SALAHUDHEEN KURIKKAL, PAYYANAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.C. NO. 3439 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 29th day of January, 2008. J U D G M E N T This writ petition is preferred against the order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Manjeri in Ext.P2 application. The 12th defendant died during the pendency of the suit and petitions are filed to implead his legal representatives as D15 to D17. D16 and D17 are minors and therefore IA.6/08 is filed to appoint D15 as the guardian and in case of refusal a Court guardian. The practice to be adopted is on such application notice has to go to the proposed guardian. I am informed that it has not been done therefore the order under challenge suffers from substantial irregularity and therefore I direct the Court below to issue notice to the 15th defendant in her personal capacity and as the proposed guardian of D15 and D16 in the two applications which are pending before it and on service of notice and after hearing all concerned pass necessary orders. Therefore the present order under W.P.C 3439 OF 2008 -:2:- challenge is set aside. The Court below is directed to restore I.A.6/08 and other applications and issue notice as contemplated by law. It is submitted that on account of the death of the husband she is not in a position to go out of the house as she is observing 'Iddat' and therefore a reasonable time must be given to her for appearance before Court. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-