C C MATHEW Vs. STATE OF KERALA
LAWS(KER)-1967-1-18
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Decided on January 12,1967

C.C.MATHEW Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF KERALA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) This writ petition was posted along with the representations received from the 6th and 8th respondents that the provisions of the Indian Soldiers' Litigation Act, 1925 may be taken into account and proceedings in this writ petition may be kept in abeyance. I considered these representations before arguments were heard on this writ petition.
(2.) S.6 of the Indian Soldiers' Litigation Act in so far as it is material, reads as follows: "6. Notice to be given in case of unrepresentative Indian Soldier -- (1) If a Collector has certified under S.5, or if the Court has reason to believe, that an Indian soldier, who is a party to any proceeding pending before it, is unable to appear therein, and if the soldier is not represented by any person duly authorised to appear, plead or act on his behalf, the court shall suspend the proceeding, and shall give notice thereof in the prescribed manner to the prescribed authority: Provided that the Court may refrain from suspending the proceeding and issuing the notice if- (a) the proceedings is a suit, appeal or application instituted or made by the soldier alone or conjointly with others with the object of enforcing a right of preemption, or (b) the interests of the soldier in the proceeding are, in the opinion of the Court, either identical with those of any other party to the proceeding and adequately represented by such other party or merely of a formal nature. x x x x x"
(3.) The interests of respondents 2 to 8 in this writ petition are identical as would appear from the discussion following hereinafter. The 8th respondent is represented before me by an Advocate and being so, is not entitled under Clause.1 of S.6, to have the proceedings suspended. The interests of the 6th respondent fas indeed of respondents 2 to 5 and 7), are, in my opinion, identical with those of the 8th respondent, and are adequately represented by him. I therefore refrain from suspending the proceedings under the proviso to S.6 of the Act, and proceed to consider the matter on the merits.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.