Remanded

Venugopal M.Nair v. M/S. Maruti Habitat & Realtors India Pvt. Ltd.

Kerala HC13 Dec 2012OP(C)/3998/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the petitioner an opportunity to file an additional affidavit to support an amendment application detailing a joint venture agreement omitted from earlier pleadings in a suit for return of advance payment towards an apartment.

What did the court decide?

IA.No. 5372/2012 remanded for fresh consideration; petitioner to file additional affidavit with opportunity for defendants to object.

Venugopal M.Nair Vs M/S. Maruti Habitat… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2012/22ND AGRAHAYANA 1934

¶5

OP(C).No. 3998 of 2012 (O)

¶6

IA.NO.5372/2012 IN OS.121/2011 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,ERNAKULAM

¶7

PETITIONER(S):

¶8

VENUGOPAL M.NAIR, AGED 45 YEARS S/O. S. MANOHARAN NAIR, SIVAKRIPA, AMMUNNI SADANAM PANGARAPALLY P.O., MULANTHURUTHY-682314 REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SHIJU K.B. S/O. BALAKRISHNAN, AGED 36 YEARS, RESIDING AT AMMUNNI SADANAM PANGARAPALLY P.O., MULANTHURUTHY-682314.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.K.MOHAN

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

M/S. MARUTI HABITAT & REALTORS INDIA PVT. LTD. XX1/327 C, SHIVAM, 1ST FLOOR WEST LAYAM ROAD, TRIPUNITHURA HAVING ITS PRESENT ADDRESS SRILAKSHMI NEAR GOVT. SANSKRIT COLLEGE, TRIPUNITHUR-682301 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

¶12

SRI. V.VENKITESWARAN.

¶13

SRI. VENKITESWARAN

¶14

S/O. LATE P.S.V.IYER, MANAGING DIRECTOR

¶15

MARUTHI HABITAT AND REALTORS PVT. LTD., VYSHNAVI

¶16

PRASANTHI LANE, POONITHURA, PIN-682317.

¶17

SRI. GOPALA PILLAI

¶18

ALIAS S.GOPAL, FINANCE GENERAL MANAGER

¶19

NOW WORKING AS FINANCE DIRECTOR

¶20

MARUTHI HABITAT AND REALTORS PVT. LTD., SRILAKSHMI NEAR GOVT. SANSKRIT COLLEGE, TRIPUNITHURA-682301.

¶21

SRI. JOHNSON S/O. POULOSE, VELIYIL PARAMBIL HOUSE, KUREEKAD P.O. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682305.

¶22

THOMAS PAUL S/O. POULOSE, PATTASSERIL HOUSE, TRIPUNITHURA P.O. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682301.

¶23

R4,R5 BY ADV. SRI.V.K.BALACHANDRAN R1-R2 BY ADV. SRI.L.RAJESH NARAYAN

¶24

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13-12-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

APPENDIX IN O.P.(C) NO.3998 OF 2012

¶26

PETITIONER'S EXTS:

¶27

EXT.P1:TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS 121/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE SUB COURT ,ERNAKULAM

¶28

EXT.P2:TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE RESPONDENT 1 TO 3

¶29

EXT.P3:TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE RESPONDENT 4 AND 5

¶30

EXT.P4:TRUE COPY OF THE EMENDMENT APPLICATION IA 5372/2012 DTD 9/10/2012

¶31

EXT.P5:TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT EXT.P6:TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DTD 20/10/2012 IN IA NO 5372/2012

¶32

//TRUE COPY//

¶33

P.S. TO JUDGE.

¶34

V.CHITAMBARESH, J.

¶35

O.P.(C) No. 3998 of 2012

¶36

Dated this the 13^th day of December, 2012

¶37

J U D G M E N T

¶38

The suit is one for return of the amount paid as advance towards purchase of one apartment in a high rise building. Defendants 4 and 5 are the owners of the land wherein defendants 1 to 3 who are the builders proposed to put up the high rise building. The plaintiff though had impleaded defendants 4 and 5 did not incorporate sufficient pleadings to cast liability on them also in the event of a decree being passed.

¶39

The plaintiff subsequently learnt that defendants 4 and 5 have executed a power of attorney in favour of defendants 1 to 3 and that there is also a joint venture agreement amongst them. The application for amendment however lacks clarity as regards the details of the document and the circumstances under which it was omitted to be stated earlier. The plaintiff seeks an opportunity to file an additional affidavit in support of the application for amendment. I am inclined to accede to the request since the suit is one for return of advance amount which comes to a sizable sum.

¶40

O.P.(C) No.3998/2012

¶41

¶42

The impugned order is set aside and I.A.No.5372/2012 in O.S.No.121/2011 on the file of the court of

¶43

the Subordinate Judge of Ernakulam is remanded for fresh consideration. The petitioner/plaintiff will be given an opportunity to file an additional affidavit in the application for amendment of the plaint. Needless to say that all the defendants will be afforded an opportunity to file objection incase an additional affidavit is filed to the application for amendment.

¶44

The original petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶45

V.CHITAMBARESH, Judge.

¶46

nj.

Venugopal M.Nair v. M/S. Maruti Habitat & Realtors India Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Venugopal M.Nair v. M/S. Maruti Habitat & Realtors India Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mathew A.T. Vs S. Roopkala Jagath

State of Kerala Vs Kuttan Nair Krishnan Nair

Saidalavi Vs Kadheeja

Nirmala Vs Vijayaraj

T.Ali Vs M/S.India Garments Capital and Finance Limited

M.U. Kuriakose Vs K.J. John