Case between Rev. Fr. Varghese Manavalan et al vs Sibichan Sebastian et al regarding impleadment of additional defendants.

Case Summary

Rev. Fr. Varghese Manavalan and others are the plaintiffs, while Sibichan Sebastian and others are the additional defendants seeking to be included in the suit. The case involves a petition for impleadment in a suit concerning the operation and control of St. Mary's Cathedral Basilica.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won

Interim Order

The court dismissed the petition for impleadment of additional defendants, stating that their presence was not necessary for the adjudication of the suit. The court found the petition without merit and directed the parties to bear their own costs.

Judgment Favored

Defendant

Relief Granted

Case Type

Final Judgment

No

The court dismissed the petition for impleadment of additional defendants, stating that their presence was not necessary for the adjudication of the suit. The court found the petition without merit and directed the parties to bear their own costs.

Key Reasoning:
The petitioners were found not to be necessary parties for effective adjudication.

Why Defendant Won:
Not available

Supporting Evidence

The court is satisfied that the petitioners herein are not necessary for the effective adjudication of the suit and the presence of petitioners are not necessary for the final adjudication of the suit.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, 1) Petition is dismissed.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: Rev. Fr. Varghese Manavalan

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: Bishop Bosco Puthur

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: Rev. Fr. Joshy Puthuva

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Sibichan Sebastian
Party Age: 50
Relation: S/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Godfer P A
Party Age: 51
Relation: S/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Baby Joseph
Party Age: 68
Relation: S/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Thomas N V
Party Age: 63
Relation: S/o

Plaintiffs Documents

Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: A Balagopalan
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Rajagopalan A
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: M N Manmadan
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Sojo J Kallidukkil
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Seena P
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Prabhu Murali
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Sruthy R Menon
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Amal A R
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Achuth J Warrier
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Jose Kuriakose K
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Remya Gilbert
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other

Outcome: Refused

Description:

Petition to implead additional defendants in the suit.

Evidence:

Accordingly, I find no merit in the above petition.

Documents & Evidence

Case Classification