KUTHUPARAMBA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY Vs. K C ROSAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE suit is one for a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction in regard to a pathway. The defendants later raised a counter claim as per Order VIII Rule 6A of the Code of Civil Procedure. The counter claim is to the effect that the compromise plan, judgment and decree in O.S.No.211 of 1990 is null and void.

(2.) ONE Mr.V.P.G.Nambiar was a party to the decree in O.S.No.211 of 1990 who is not a party to the present suit. The court below has held that the counter claim without the junction of Mr.V.P.G.Nambiar would not lie. Hence the counter claim was excluded under Order VIII Rule 6C of the Code of Civil Procedure as sought by the plaintiffs. The order excluding the counter claim is under challenge in the original petition.

(3.) IT is brought to my notice that the defendants have already filed yet another suit in O.S.No.187 of 2006 on the file of the court of the Munsiff of Koothuparamba. It is up to the petitioner who is one of the plaintiffs in O.S.No.187 of 2006 to apply for appropriate amendment of the plaint, if necessary. The respondents point out that the relief proposed to be introduced by amendment would be barred by limitation. It is a matter to be considered by the court below at the appropriate time.