Shamsudeen v. Sebastian
Case brief
What is this about?
Appeal against an order allowing review of an impleadment decision dismissed for lack of maintainability as it did not re-determine parties' rights.
What did the court decide?
Judgment dismissing the appeal for being not maintainable.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH JUNE 2011 / 18TH JYAISHTA 1933 FAO.No. 354 of 2010() --------------------I.A.NO.772/10 IN OS.125/2008 of SUB COURT, PALA ....................
APPELLANT/COUNTER PETITIONER/DEFENDANTS NO.1
SHAMSUDEEN, S/O.ABDUL AZEEZ, THOTTATHIL,KANJIRAPPALLY PO, KANJIRAPPALLY VILLAGE, KANJIRAPPALLY TALUK.
BY ADV. SRI.LIJI.J.VADAKEDOM
RESPONDENT(S): PLAINTIFF AND COUNTER PETITIONERS 2 & 3 DEFENDANT
- SEBASTIAN,S/O.MATHEW, MADUKKAKUZHY HOUSE,THAMBALAKADU P.O, KANJIRAPPALLY VILLAGE, KANJIRAPPALLY TALUK-686 506.
- AJIKUMAR P.S. S/O.SREEGHARAN, THADIPLAKIL(ATHALLI) HOUSE, ETTUMNOOE PO,KIZHAKKUM BHAGOM KARA, ETTUMANOOR VILLAGE-686 631.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an appeal against an order allowing impleadment of parties is maintainable if no rights of parties are re-determined.
Whether an appeal challenging a review order is maintainable when the underlying impleadment order did not determine substantive rights.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Shamsudeen
- respondent
Sebastian
- respondent
Ajikumar P.S.
- respondent
Babu Mathew
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court