TEVALAPPURATHU KUDUMBAYOGAM Vs. KUNJANIYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are defendant Nos. 2 to 13 in O.S.No.361 of 2024 on the files of the Munsiff Court, Haripad. Respondents 1 and 2 filed the suit to set aside the decision of the general body held on 1/12/2024, suspending the plaintiffs for 10 years from the primary membership. Along with the suit, an application for an interim prohibitory injunction was also filed as I.A. No.1 of 2024. In the suit, only the members of the elected committee, having charge for one year, were arrayed as defendants. None of the family members, who participated in the general body, which took the decision to suspend the plaintiffs, were arrayed as defendants. To the interim injunction application, a detailed counter affidavit pointing out the non-joinder of necessary parties, was also filed. Immediately, respondents 1 and 2 filed a petition to amend the plaint to convert the suit into one of representative suits under Order 1 Rule 8 CPC. The application was allowed, and the plaintiff was directed to carry out the amendment.

(2.) The next day, the plaintiff filed an application as I.A. No.7 of 2025 under Order 1 Rule 8 for leave to convert the suit as a representative suit. A detailed counter affidavit was filed, but the learned Magistrate allowed the application on 28/2/2025. The petitioners have a case that the learned Magistrate, after allowing the application, posted the case to 12/3/2025. Ext.P9 is the e-court status. But on the very next day, P10 shows that the next date of hearing is 3/3/2025, when a carbon copy application of the order in I.A.No.7 of 2025 was filed on 1/3/2025. The petitioner challenges Ext.P8 in this O.P.(C).

(3.) The main ground on which this O.P. filed is that there is a total non-application of mind into the grounds raised opposing the application to allow the suit to be converted into a representative suit under Order 1 Rule 8. He contends that without making the entire members of the general body, who took the decision to suspend the plaintiffs for 10 years, the suit cannot be proceeded with. When such a contention was raised, the present application was filed to convert the suit to a representative suit, though the application was filed on 28/2/2205. The plaintiffs have not complied with the provision under Order 1 Rule 8 till date and without doing so, they are pressing for an interim injunction which the court cannot grant.