Case Summary
The case involves Catholic Truth Charitable Society and its representatives as plaintiffs against the Ernakulam Angamaly Archdiocese Bishop House and other defendants. The court found that the plaintiffs had no individual right or title to the suit property and rejected the case.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court ruled that the plaintiffs lack the necessary standing to maintain the suit as they do not have individual rights regarding the property in question. Therefore, the case was rejected.
Key Reasoning:
The court determined that the plaintiffs had no individual rights or title to maintain the suit.
The court determined that the plaintiffs had no individual rights or title to maintain the suit.
Why Defendant Won:
The court determined that the plaintiffs had no individual rights or title to maintain the suit.
The court determined that the plaintiffs had no individual rights or title to maintain the suit.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiffs per se has no individual right or title with respect to the suit property to have a locus standi in this case.
Judgment Evidence:
The suit is filed without obtaining a permission under Order 1 Rule 8 and no permission has been obtained till date. Hence suit is not maintainable and is rejected.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Catholic Truth Charitable Society
- Relation
- represented by
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sebastian Koikkara Kurian
- Party Age
- 66
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Joshi Varghese
- Party Age
- 56
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sebastian Koikkara
- Party Age
- 66
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Joshi Varghese
- Party Age
- 56
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Ernakulam Angamaly Archdiocese Bishop House
- Party Age
- 69
- Relation
- represented by
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Archbishop Mar Antony Kariyil CMI
- Party Age
- 69
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Cardinal Mar George Alancheri
- Party Age
- 74
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Fr. Joshi Pudhuva
- Party Age
- 44
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Lakshmanan Lakshmi
- Party Age
- 51
- Relation
- W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- V. Rajendran
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Law Firm
- Perumbavur
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- M. Narendrakumar
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Rajesh N
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Litto Palathingal
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- K.B Mohanan
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Baby M.M
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Jijo Paul Kalloorkkaran
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Saju N. A
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Lekha G
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Uma G. Krishnan
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Flony P. J
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Aleesha M. P
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Anupama Radhakrishnan
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Catholic Truth Charitable Society et al vs Ernakulam Angamaly Archdiocese Bishop House et al regarding representative suit rejection
Case Code Year
Case between Catholic Truth Charitable Society et al vs Ernakulam Angamaly Archdiocese Bishop House et al regarding representative suit rejection