KERALA HIGH COURT ADVOCATES ASSOCIATION Vs. BABBALAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the counsel for the petitioners.

(2.) The grievance of the petitioners / defendants in OS 85/2009 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Ernakulam is that the learned Munsiff has granted leave to the respondents / plaintiffs to institute the suit aforesaid under S.91(1)(b) of the CPC without hearing the petitioners and without applying his mind to the question as to whether the facts of the case really attracts S.91 of the Civil Procedure Code.

(3.) The leave under S.91(1)(b) on a motion made by two or more persons to prevent wrongful act though can be granted initially by the Court by an interim order, is not leave so as to prosecute the suit if grant of such leave is objected to by the defendants raising serious objections to such grant of leave. In that event, it is for the Court which granted initial leave to hear the defendants as well and then decide as to whether the leave granted is to be made absolute or is to be vacated / revoked.