Allowed

Sobhana Ajaykumar v. Jayakhosh

Kerala HC24 Jun 2015OP(C)/364/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application for amendment of plaint in a suit for declaration of title and injunction. The court set aside the lower court's rejection, permitting the plaintiff to correct errors and raise a new plea after payment of costs.

What did the court decide?

The application for amendment of plaint (I.A. No. 130/2015) was allowed, and the impugned order of the Munsiff Court was set aside.

Sobhana Ajaykumar Vs Jayakhosh — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/3RD ASHADHA, 1937

¶5

OP(C).No. 364 of 2015 (O)

¶6

O.S. NO. 306/2010 OF MUNSIFF COURT, DEVIKULAM

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

SOBHANA AJAYKUMAR, AGED 51 YEARS W/O.LATE AJAYKUMAR

¶9

RESIDING AT IX/339C CHERUKUZHY HOUSE, ADIMALI P.O. MANNAMKANDAM VILLAGE, DEVIKULAM TALUK

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1. JAYAKHOSH, AGED 49 S/O.KUTTAPPAN, RESIDING AT CHERUKUZHY HOUSE ADIMALI P.O., MANNAMKANDAM VILLAGE, DEVIKULAM TALUK 673 001

¶13

2. THANKAMMA, AGED 80 W/O.ACHUTHAN, RESIDING AT KAPPLAAMKUDI HOUSE KEEZHILLAM, PERUMAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 682021

¶14

3. AMMINI, AGED 78 W/O.SIVAN, RESIDING AT PUTHENPURAYIL HOUSE ADIMALI KARA, MANNAMKANDAM VILLAGE 673001

¶15

4. RADHA, AGED 75

¶16

D/O.LATE KUTTAPPAN, RESIDING AT CHERUKUZHY HOUSE C.V.STORES, ADIMALI, MANNAMKANDAM VILLAGE 673001

¶17

5. VALSA, AGED 70

¶18

W/O.RAJAN, VAZHATTU HOUSE SENAPATHY P.O., PALLIKUNNU SANTHANPARA VILLAGE 673001

¶19

6. VIJAYAMMA, AGED 53 W/O.SASI, RESIDING AT KUPASSERIL HOUSE, ADIMALI P.O MANNAMKANDAM VILLAGE, 673001

¶20

DCS

¶21

OP(C).No. 364 of 2015 (O)

¶22

7. SHYLA ASOKAN, AGED 49 W/O.ASOKAN, RESIDING AT MONADAN HOUSE, ADIMALI MANNAMKANDAM VILLAGE 673001

¶23

8. ANJU AJAYKUMAR D/O.LATE AJAYKUMAR RESIDING AT IX/339 C CHERUKUZHY HOUSE, ADIMALI P.O. MANNAMKANDAM VILLAGE, DEVIKULAM TALUK

¶24

9. ARUNKUMAR AJAY S/O.LATE AJAYKUMAR RESIDING AT IX /339 C CHERUKUZHY HOUSE ADIMALI P.O., MANNAMKANDAM VILLAGE DEVIKULAM TALUK 673001

¶25

R1 BY ADV. SRI.PADAYATTEE YELDO

¶26

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶27

DCS

¶28

OP(C).No. 364 of 2015 (O)

¶29

APPENDIX

¶30

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶31

P1: A TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS. NO.306 OF 2010 DATED 04.12.2010 ON THE FILE OF THE MUSIFF COURT, DEVIKULAM

¶32

P2: A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION IA. NO.. 130 OF 2015 DATED 04.02.2015 IN EXT P1 SUIT

¶33

P3: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED MUNSIFF IN IA. NO.130 OF 2015 IN OS. NO.306 OF 2010 ON THE FILES OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, DEVIKULAM DATED 04.02.2015

¶34

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:- NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A. TO JUDGE

DCS

V. CHITAMBARESH, J

¶39

O.P.(C). NO. 364 OF 2015

¶40

Dated this the 24^th day of June, 2015

¶41

JUDGMENT

¶42

The Court below has by the order impugned rejected the application for amendment of the plaint. The suit is one for declaration of title and for consequential injunction.

¶43

The amendments sought are only to correct the year and date and also to raise a legal plea. Such amendment will not alter the character of the suit or prejudice the defendants in any way.

¶44

I am satisfied that the plaintiff could not raise the issue before the commencement of trial in spite of due diligence in the circumstances. The delay on the part of the plaintiff can ofcourse be condoned on payment of costs to the defendants. Ext. P3 order is set aside and I.A. No. 130/2015 in O.S. No. 306/2010 on the file of the

¶45

Court of the Munsiff of Devikulam is allowed. This is

¶46

O.P.(C). NO. 364 OF 2015 2

¶47

subject to the condition that the plaintiff pays a sum of Rs. 10,000/- as costs to the counsel for the first defendant Adv. Sri. Padayattee Yeldo within a period of two weeks from today.

¶48

The Court of the Munsiff of Devikulam shall forthwith transmit the records to the Munnar Special Tribunal for further steps. The Registry shall forward a copy of the judgment to the Court of the Munsiff of Devikulam as well as the Munnar Special Tribunal.

¶49

The Original Petition is disposed of.

¶50

V. CHITAMBARESH JUDGE

¶51

DCS

¶52

A sum of 10,000- (Rupees Ten thousand only) has been₹ paid as costs to the learned counsel for the first respondent, Adv. Shri. Padayattee Yeldo within the stipulated time in compliance of the direction in the judgment dated 24.06.2015 in O.P.(C). No. 364/2015, vide memo dated 15.07.2015 bearing cf. no. 5655/2015.

¶53

sd/Registrar (Judicial)

¶54

O.P.(C). NO. 364 OF 2015 3

¶55

Order dated 13.11.2015 in R.P. 1025/2015 in O.P.(C). No. 364/2015 is appended with the original order dated 24.06.2015 in O.P.(C). No. 364/2015.

¶56

sd/-

¶57

Registrar(Judicial)

Sobhana Ajaykumar v. Jayakhosh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sobhana Ajaykumar v. Jayakhosh

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

Sarojini Amma Vs Village Officer

Taiju Vs the Additional District Magistrate

K.S.Binu Vs Assistant Engineer

Shereef Vs the Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies

A.P.Anilkumar Vs the District Collector, Alappuzha

P.P.Varghese Vs the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation