LAISHRAM (N) MANGILEIMA DEVI Vs. HAOBAM (N) KSHETRIMAYUM ONGBI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. N. Sashikanta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners.

(2.) THIS Court is difficult to understand the head and tail of the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners who are the plaintiffs of O.S. No. 21 of 2009/19 of 2012. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners could not convince the Court as to how the plaintiffs are aggrieved by the impugned order dated 11.09.2012 passed in the said Original Suit inasmuch as the learned Civil Judge(Senior Division) No. 1, Manipur East by the impugned order refused to entertain the issue No. 3 i.e. "Whether the Suit is barred by Res -Judicata" in the absence of the plaint/ and written statement of the earlier suit. The issue No. 3 is framed on the basis of the facts pleaded by the defendant/respondent in written statement in the O.S. No. 21 of 2009/19 of 2012. In case, issue No. 3 is decided against the present petitioners (plaintiffs), O.S. No. 21 of 2009/19 of 2012 will not be entertained. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the learned Court below should consider the issue No. 3 afresh, but no cogent reason had been made out by the petitioners for directing the learned Court below to hear issue No. 3 afresh by setting aside the impugned order of the learned Civil Judge(Senior Division), No. 1, Manipur East dated 11.09.2012.

(3.) LEARNED Court below i.e. learned Civil Judge(Senior Division), No. 1, Manipur East by the impugned order dated 11.09.2012 had not decided the issue No. 3 as no sufficient materials are available in Judicial Misc. No. 127 of 2012.