IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 29TH MAY 2008 / 8TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 17069 of 2007(F) ------------------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER IN IA 1715/2006 IN OPEA.14/2005 of MUNSIFF-MAGISTRATE COURT, CHALAKUDY .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- JOSE (JOSE J.PYNADATH), S/O. PYNADATH JOSEPH, CHALAKUDY DESOM, CHALAKUDY VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.) SRI. R. JAYACHANDRAN RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- A.M. CHANDRASEKHARAN, S/O. AINIKATTIL MANI, CHALAKUDY DESOM, WEST CHALAKUDY VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.N.RAMAKRISHNAN NAIR R1 SRI.P.VISWANATHAN R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.C NO.17069/2007 F APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT - P1 : TRUE COPY OF I.A.NO.1715 OF 2006 IN O.P.NO.14 OF 2005 FILED BY THE PETITIONER EXT - P2 : TRUE COPY OF COUNTER FILED BY THE RESPONDENT IN IA 1715 OF 2006. EXT - P3 : TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 24.3.2007 BY THE LEARNED MUNSIFF IN I.A NO. 1715 OF 2006 IN O.P. 14 OF 2005. /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE RHS M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.17069 of 2007 ------------------------------- Dated this the 29th May, 2008. J U D G M E N T This petition is filed challenging Ext.P3 order passed by Munsiff, Chalakudy, in I.A.No.1715/06 in Election O.P.No.14/2005. Election O.P. was filed by the petitioner to set aside the election of the respondent. I.A.No.1715/06 was filed to amend the election petition incorporating additional facts. It was dismissed under Ext.P3 order which is challenged in this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondent were heard. 3. On going through Ext.P3 order and hearing the learned counsel appearing for both parties, I do not find any illegality or irregularity in Ext.P3 order warranting interference in exercise of the powers of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. As rightly pointed out by the learned Munsiff, even though there are five respondents in the election petition, in I.A.No.1715/2006, petitioner W.P.(C) No.17069/2007 2 did not implead the other respondents. Moreover, no reason is shows why the pleading sought to be introduced were omitted to be mentioned earlier. There is no illegality or irregularity in the order challenged. In such circumstances, petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE nj.