K K GOPINATHAN Vs. K KUTTAN NAIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above writ petition and the revision petition are filed by the defendant in O.S. No. 107 of 2005 on the file of the Munsiff-Magistrate Court, Pattambi. Respondent in both the petitions is the plaintiff in the above suit. Suit is one for damages for a sum of Re. 1/- for the alleged publication of defamatory statement against the plaintiff/respondent by the defendant. Since the question arising for consideration in the writ petition and also in the revision petition are interconnected, and after being heard together, they are disposed of by this common judgment/order.

(2.) The petitioner/defendant in his written statement among other contentions challenged the jurisdiction of the court to entertain the suit contending that no part of the cause of action arose within its jurisdiction. After settling the issues in the suit, the issue relating to jurisdiction was considered, preliminarily, and the learned Munsiff after hearing the counsel on both sides found that the court has jurisdiction to entertain the suit and answered that issue accordingly. Challenging that order of the learned Munsiff, petitioner has filed the above revision. Plaintiff filed a replication in answer to the contentions taken by the petitioner/defendant in his written statement, the reception of which was objected to by the defendant. Learned Munsiff after hearing both sides passed an order accepting the replication reserving the question whether any new pleading has been brought in thereunder to be relegated for consideration at the stage of trial. Propriety and correctness of that order Is impeached in the writ petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) I heard the counsel on both sides