Abdul Karim vs Dhanalakshmi Ammal on 27 February, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 6422 of 2009(O)


1.  ABDUL KARIM, S/O.LATE LEVA SAHIB,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. DHANALAKSHMI AMMAL, W/O.LATE RAMU GOWDER
                       ...       Respondent

2. SIVALINGAPPA GOWDER,S/O ANANTHARAMA

                For Petitioner  :SRI.A.R.GANGADAS

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

 Dated :27/02/2009

 O R D E R
                          K.T.SANKARAN, J.
                  ---------------------------------------------
                     W.P.(C).No.6422 of 2009
                  ---------------------------------------------
             Dated this the 27th day of February, 2009



                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner is the first defendant in O.S.No.96/08 on the

file of the court of the Principal Munsiff of Palakkad. The first

respondent/plaintiff filed I.A.No.3408/08 for amendment of

plaint. The application was allowed by the court below as per

Ext.P7 order dated 12th January 2009. Ext.P7 order is under

challenge in this Writ Petition.

2. By the amendment sought to be introduced, the

survey number of item No.4 of the plaint schedule is sought to be

changed and the resurvey number is sought to be introduced.

There is no change in respect of the boundaries of the property

or the description of the property or the measurement of the

property. There was no delay in filing the application for

amendment. The court below held that by allowing the

amendment, the nature and character of the suit would not be

changed. The court below noticed that by allowing the

amendment, no prejudice would be caused to the defendants.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that

WPC No.6422/2009 2

in the title deed of the plaintiff, which is marked as Ext.P2 in the

Writ Petition, the survey number noted is 806/B and that survey

number was shown in the plaint. He also pointed out that the

first defendant has obtained purchase certificate from the Land

Tribunal in respect of survey No.806/13. Now, by the

amendment, the plaintiff seeks to amend the survey number of

item No.4 from 806/B to 806/13. The counsel submits that the

first defendant would be seriously affected if his property is

included in the suit, by the amendment.

4. These are all matters for consideration by the court on

the merits of the case at the time of disposal of the suit. At the

time of considering the question whether the amendment of

plaint should be allowed, the truth or falsity of the averments or

the sustainability of the plea need not be considered. The court

below was justified in allowing the amendment. I do not think

that the court below committed any error of jurisdiction in

allowing the amendment.

The Writ Petition lacks merit and it is accordingly

dismissed.

K.T.SANKARAN,
JUDGE
csl