Dismissed

Ajithkrishna v. Sudhakaran & Others

Kerala HC21 Jul 2008CRP/592/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed a revision petition against the dismissal of an application to amend a plaint. It held that no revision lies as the suit itself was not pending (having been dismissed for default) and the application to amend would not have finally disposed of the suit.

What did the court decide?

Revision petition dismissed as no revision lay under the proviso to Section 115 CPC given the suit was dismissed for default and the amendment did not dispose of the suit.

Ajithkrishna Vs Sudhakaran & Others — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

MONDAY, THE 21ST JULY 2008 / 30TH ASHADHA 1930

¶5

CRP.No. 592 of 2006() --------------------AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 15/03/2006 IN IA.NO.696/2005 IN OS.167/2002 of MUNSIFF COURT, PUNALUR

¶6

REVN. PETITIONER: PETITIONER/2ND PLAINTIFF:

¶7

¶8

AJITHKRISHNA, S/O. DAMODARAN, KISHOR BHAVAN, PUNNALA, NOW RESIDING AT OMKARAM, HOUSE NO.310, AKG NAGAR, PEROORKKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.R.ARUN RAJ

¶10

RESPONDENTS: COUNTER PETITIONERS/DEFENDANTS & 1ST PLAINTIFF:

¶11

¶12

SUDHAKARAN, S/O. CHELLAPPAN, SWAPNA BHAVAN, BHARANIKAVU, PUNALUR P.O.,KOLLAM.

¶13

SARALAMMA, W/O. SUDHAKARAN, SWAPNA BHAVAN, BHARANIKAVU, PUNALUR P.O., KOLLAM.

¶14

PRASANTHAKUMARI, W/O.LATE DAMODARAN, KISHOR BHAVAN, PUNNALA, NOW RESIDING AT OMKARAM, HOUSE NO.310, AKG NAGAR, PEROORKKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶15

KISHOR, S/O. LATE DAMODARAN, KISHOR BHAVAN, PUNNALA, NOW RESIDING AT OMKARAM, HOUSE NO.310, AKG NAGAR, PEROORKKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶16

ANILA RANI, D/O.PRASANTHAKUMARI, KISHOR BHAVAN, PUNNALA, NOW RESIDING AT OMKARAM, HOUSE NO.310, AKG NAGAR, PEROORKKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶17

BY ADV. SRI.R.KRISHNAKUMAR (CHERTHALA) FOR R3 - 5

¶18

THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶20

C.R.P.No.592 of 2006

¶21

Dated this the 21^st July, 2008.

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

This revision petition is filed under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure challenging dismissal of I.A.No.696 of 2005 in O.S.No.167 of 2002, an application filed under Rule 17 of Order VI of Code of Civil Procedure, to amend the plaint. Even if the revision is to be allowed and I.A.No.696 of 2005 is to be allowed, as sought for by the revision petitioner, it will not finally dispose the suit. Hence, as provided under proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure, no revision will lie. Moreover, the suit itself is not pending as it was dismissed for default, and a petition filed under Rule 9 of Order IX of Code of Civil Procedure to restore the suit was also dismissed, and what is now pending is only a petition to restore that application. Revision petition is dismissed.

¶24

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE

¶25

nj.

Ajithkrishna v. Sudhakaran & Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajithkrishna v. Sudhakaran & Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.Mohankumar Vs Travancore Devaswom Board

Hamsa Vs K.E.Sundaran and Another

Kottayam District Co.Op.Bank Vs Saidkutty

State of Kerala Vs Urumees

Hanis Vs Ramachandran & Another

Attaparambil Moideenkutty Vs Kozhippurath Mohammed