UNION OF INDIA Vs. R GOPALAKRISHNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE suit was filed for declaration that the plaintiff belong to Kattunaicken community. The trial Court decreed the suit and the appellate Court has also confirmed it. Against that, the present second appeal has been filed.

(2.) THE substantial questions of law that are framed in this appeal are as follows:

(3.) MR .K. Kannan, learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that admittedly the plaintiff when he entered the service was a Member of Vaduga Community which is a backward clause community. Because of his marriage with a woman of Kattu Naicken community, he claims that his community also become changed and he also become a Kattunaicken and hence the suit has been filed.