Kerala High Court
Sobhana Sudarsan vs Babu Rajendran
Author: S.S.Satheesachandran
Bench: S.S.Satheesachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2012/5TH PHALGUNA 1933
OP(C).No. 616 of 2012 (O)
-------------------------
NO. IN OS.269/1973 of I ADDL.SUB COURT, THRISSUR
PETITIONER(S):
-------------
1. SOBHANA SUDARSAN
D/O. LATE SANKARAN KUTTY, KALARIKKAL HOUSE,
P.O. AGADIYUR, KUNNAMKULAM, THRISSUR.
2. SANTHA KUMARI,
D/O. LATE SANKARAN KUTTY, MAMPRAMBATH HOUSE,
P.O. VADAKKUMURI, PERINGOTTUKARA, THRISSUR.
BY ADVS.SRI.V.BINOY RAM
SMT.SAJITHA P.SOMAN
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. BABU RAJENDRAN
S/O. PARAYAN NARAYANAN, KOLAZHY VILLAGE, DESOM
THRISSUR TALUK - 680 010.
2. USHA DEVI,
D/O. PARARATH NARAYANAN, KOLAZHI VILLAGE
MULANKUNNATHUKAVU, THRISSUR - 680 581.
3. LEELAVATHY,
D/O. PARARATH NARAYANAN, RESIDING AT CALICUT
NOW RESIDING AT KOLAZHI VILLAGE, MULANKUNNATHUKAVU
THRISSUR - 680 581.
4. LAKSHMY KANTHAN,
S/O. PARARATH NARAYANAN, KOLAZHY DESOM, VILLAGE
THRISSUR - 680 010.
5. SUN LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANYOF CANADA,
P.B. NO. 26, COLOMBO, SRILANKA.
6. A.M.M. ABDUL KHADER,
GENERAL HARDWARE, STREET 114, THIRD CROSS STREET
COLOMBO II, SRI LANKA.
7. P. VIJAYARAGHVAN,
D. 404, YOGI NAGAR, NEAR AMBIKA NAGAR
GUJARAT, PIN - 388 001.
LSN -----2------
--2--
OP(C).No. 616 of 2012 (O)
8. P.N. PRABHASANKAR,
PARARATH HOUSE, KRISHNA KRIPA, P.O.ATHANI
THRISSUR - 683 585.
9. JANAKI,
W/O. LATE SANKARAN KUTTY, JANAKI NILAYAM, PERINGAVU
THRISSUR - 680 018.
10. SWAROOPA RANI,
D/O. LATE SANKARAN KUTTY, KUNNATHULLY HOUSE
CROSS LINE, CHEMBUKAVU, THRISSUR - 680 001.
11. VALSALA,
D/O. LATE SANKARAN KUTTY, JANAKI NILAYAM, PERINGAVU
THRISSUR - 680 018.
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
24-02-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
LSN
OP(C).No. 616 of 2012 (O)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS :
EXHIBIT-P1-TRUE COPY OF THE I.A 5292/2002 IN I.A 677/1976 IN
O.S 269/1973 ON THE FILE OF ADDL. SUB COURT, THRISSUR.
EXHIBIT-P2-TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PREDECESSOR OF
THE PETITIONERS IN EXHIBIT-P1.
EXHIBIT-P3-TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19/01/2004 IN IA 5292/2002
IN I.A 677/1976 IN O.S 269/1973 ON THE FILE OF ADDL.
SUB COURT, THRISSUR.
EXHIBIT-P4-TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19/01/2004 IN I.A 5293/2002
IN I.A 677/1996 IN O.S 269/1973 ON THE FILE OF ADDL.
SUB COURT, THRISSUR.
EXHIBIT-P5-TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19/01/2004 IN O.A 5309/2002
IN I.A 677/1976 IN O.S 269/1973 ON THE FILE OF ADDL.
SUB COURT, THRISSUR.
EXHIBIT-P6-TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19/01/2004 IN I.A 5310/2002
IN I.A. 677/1976 IN O.S 269/1973 ON THE FILE OF ADDL.
SUB COURT, THRISSUR.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE.
LSN
S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN,J.
---------------------------------------
O.P. (c) NO. 616 of 2012
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 24th day of February, 2012
JUDGMENT
Challenge in the original petition is against P3 to P6 orders passed in the course of the final decree proceedings in O.S. No. 269/1973 by the learned Sub Judge, Thrissur. On the death of the applicant in the final decree application, the petitioners in Ext.P1 application applied for getting themselves impleaded as additional petitioners claiming to be the legal representatives of the applicant. They also moved a petition for setting aside the abatement arising on the death of the applicant. Both the above applications were allowed by the learned Sub Judge negativing the objections raised by the predecessor of the present petitioners who was the first respondent in the final decree proceedings. Admittedly, the first respondent had challenged P3 to P6 orders by filing a writ petition before this court numbered as W.P. (C) No : 3894/2004. Pending that writ petition the O.P. (c) NO. 616 of 2012 2 aforesaid first respondent, the petitioner therein passed away. Since his legal representatives were not brought on record the writ petition was dismissed as abated by judgment dated 25.05.2007. As against that judgment the present petitioners, the legal representatives of the petitioner in the above writ petition moved a review petition as R.P. No. 787/2011. That review petition was also dismissed but with the following order.
"The legal representatives of writ petitioner who died more than 1 1/2 years prior to the date of the impugned judgment are now seeking review of the judgment seeking permission to continue the writ petition as additional writ petitioners. If the cause of action on the basis of which the writ petition was instituted by their predecessor in interest survives, it is open to them to initiate fresh writ petition. With this observation this R.P. is dismissed". Orders passed as above passed enable the present petitioners, the legal representatives of the petitioner in the writ petition, namely, W.P. No. 3894/2004, to file a fresh petition to challenge Ext. P3 to P6 orders passed by the learned Sub Judge invoking the visitorial jurisdiction vested with this court under O.P. (c) NO. 616 of 2012 3 Article 227 of the Constitution of India is their case. I cannot agree. Challenge as against judicial orders passed by a competent court, which was raised by the predecessor of the petitioners, the first respondent in the final decree proceedings, no doubt, can be continued by them on his death getting substituted in such proceedings. Filing of a fresh writ petition as if cause of action would survive to them on disposal of a previous writ petition for challenging the orders covered in the present case, is not contemplated by law. They have no statutory or common law right to impeach Ext.P3 to P6 orders passed in the final decree proceedings when the challenge against those orders by their predecessor, a party to the proceeding, had been turned down for whatever be the reasons thereof. Original petition is not entertainable, and it is dismissed.
S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE.
DMR/-