High Court Kerala High Court

Abraham Varghese vs Nisha Abraham on 17 June, 2008

Kerala High Court
Abraham Varghese vs Nisha Abraham on 17 June, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 18058 of 2008(S)


1. ABRAHAM VARGHESE, S/O.VARGHESE ABRAHAM,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. NISHA ABRAHAM, D/O.ZACHARIAH, AGED
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.J.GEORGE KUNNUMPURATH

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice HARUN-UL-RASHID

 Dated :17/06/2008

 O R D E R
              KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ.
                       ------------------------------------------
                        W.P.(C) No.18058 of 2008
                      -------------------------------------------
                  Dated this the 17th day of June 2008

                                   JUDGMENT

Harun-Ul-Rashid ,J

The petitioner herein is the 1st respondent in I.A. No. 3575/2007 in

O.P No. 194/2006 on the file of the Family Court Alappuzha. I.A. No.

3575/2007 was filed by the Petitioner in O.P 194/2006 for amending ‘C’

relief to the plaint. The amendment sought for is to insert a prayer to

recover interest at the rate of 24% on the amount due from the petitioner

Ext.P3 is the amendment application. The petitioner herein filed Ext.P4

objection. The Family court after hearing both sides passed Ext.P5 order

allowing the amendment application.

2. The petitioner opposed Ext.P5 order stating that it is a non-

speaking order and was passed without considering Ext.P4 objection. It

is also contended that the amendment sought for, will change the nature

and character of the suit and if allowed,it will result in miscarriage of

justice.

3. We have gone through Ext.P3 petition for amendment . The

amendment sought for is the insertion of a claim for interest at the rate of

24% from the petitioner. The amendment proposed, cannot and will not

W.P.(C) No. 18058 of 2008 -2-

change the nature and character of the suit, nor would it cause any

prejudice to the writ petitioner or other respondents in the original petition

If such an amendment is not permitted it would lead to multiplicity of

proceedings. Therefore the amendment is legal, valid and proper.

Therefore this writ petition challenging the said order is without any merit

and accordingly dismissed.

KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE

HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE

es