IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2011 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1932 OP(C).No. 1085 of 2011(O) -------------------------------------- ( I.A.NO.1680/2010 IN OS.NO.246/2009 of MUNSIFF COURT, KODUNGALLUR) .................... PETITIONERS -------------------- 1. AFSAL,S/O.KATTAKATH BAVUNNI, AGED 42 YEARS,KATTAKATH AKAKKAPPARAMBIL HOUSE, SREE NARAYANAPURAM VILLAGE, ALA DESOM,KODUNGALLUR TALUK. 2. KRISHNACHARI,S/O.KATTIPADATHUTHARAYIL, KUTTANACHERI, LOKAMALESWARAM VILLAGE,DESOM, KODUNGALLUR. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. PANDY SAMOOHAM, LOKAMALESWARAM VILLAGE DESOM, KODUNGALLUR TALUK, REP.BY PRESIDENT RAMASWAMY,S/O.KATTUPARAMBU MADATHIL, PARAMESWARA AYYAR, METHALA VILLAGE, WEST ARAKULAM DESOM, KODUNGALLUR TALUK 680 634. 2. VENUGOPAL, S/O.KARANCHERY MADATHIL SOORYA NARAYANA AYYAR,METHALA VILLAGE, SRINGAPURAM DESOM,KODUNGALLUR TALUK 680 664. BY THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts P.BHAVADASAN, J. ------------------------------------- OP(C) No.1085 of 2011-O ------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of March 2011 Judgment Ext.P7 order by which the lower appellate court ordered joint trial of seven suits, is under challenge in this OP. 2. The petitioners say that the contentions taken by the defendants are different and the joint trial may prejudice the defence of the petitioners. 3. There is no merit in the above contention at all. The court below in its order, has given cogent reasons as to why joint trial will be fit and proper and it will be to the benefit of the parties and also that the parties will be free to adduce evidence in respect of their defence. Common evidence is to be adduced in all the cases. Moreover, the defendants occupy portions of the same building. The title is in dispute. Therefore, it cannot be said that common issues do not arise for consideration. It is these aspects, OPC 1085/11 2 which have persuaded the trial court to order joint trial of the cases. There is nothing to show that the order is either perverse or irregular. There is no merit in this OP and it is accordingly dismissed. P.Bhavadasan, Judge sta OPC 1085/11 3