Disposed

V.N.Harold v. M.J.Joseph

Kerala HC5 Jun 2018OP(C)/1361/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In O.P(C) No. 1361 of 2018, the Kerala High Court directed the Munsiff's Court to expedite the disposal of an amendment application in a suit regarding property trespass. The court ordered the amendment application to be disposed of at least within two weeks and before the interim injunction application. The petition was disposed of with this directive.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed directing courts to hear amendment application within two weeks; amendment to be decided before injunction application.

V.N.Harold Vs M.J.Joseph — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE 2018 / 15TH JYAISHTA, 1940

¶5

OP(C).No. 1361 of 2018

¶6

O.S. NO. 247/2018 OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, CHERTHALA

¶7

PETITIONER

¶8

V.N.HAROLD, S/O.NICHALOUS, VALLONTHAIEL HOUSE, VAYALAR P.O., CHERTHALA-688536.

¶9

BY ADV.SRI.ROY CHACKO

¶10

RESPONDENT:

¶11

M.J.JOSEPH, S/O.V.J.JOHN, VATTAPARAMBIL HOUSE, CMC 23, CHERTHALA P.O., PIN-688524.

¶12

BY ADVS. SRI.JOY THATTIL ITTOOP SRI.BIJISH B.TOM SRI.JACOB TOMLIN VARGHESE SMT.BABY SONIA SRI.GENS GEORGE ELAVINAMANNIL

¶13

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05-06-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

sdr/8.6.18

¶15

OP(C).No. 1361 of 2018 (O)

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶18

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.NO.247/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, CHERTHALA. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE I.A.NO.1081/2018 FOR INTERIM INJUNCTION RESTRAINING THE RESPONDENT FROM TRESPASSING INTO THE PLAINT SCHEDULE PROPERTY. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT DATED 28-5-2018 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE I.A.N.1081/2018. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE I.A.NO.1246/2018 SEEKING AMENDMENT OF THE PLAINT. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE RESPONDENT TO I.A.NO.1246/2018.

¶19

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS NIL

/TRUE COPY/

PA TO JUDGE

sdr/8.6.18

Sathish Ninan, J.

¶24

==========================

¶25

O.P(C) No.1361 of 2018

¶26

=============================

¶27

Dated this the 5^th day of June, 2018

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

The petitioner confines his relief for an

¶30

expeditious consideration of I.A No.1246 of 2018 filed for amendment of the plaint. Petitioner is the plaintiff in the suit. Along with the suit the petitioner filed I.A No.1081 of 2018 for an interim injunction to restrain the respondent from trespassing into the plaint schedule property. Thereafter it was noticed that some mistakes crept in the description of the plaint schedule property and filed I.A No.1246 of 2018 seeking amendment of the plaint. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent points out that based on the schedule of property originally filed there is an interim order of injunction

¶31

O.P(C) No.1361 of 2018

¶32

-: 2 :-

¶33

which is causing irreparable injury to the respondent. The learned counsel for the petitioner would on the other

¶34

hand submits that without considering the amendment application if the injunction application is disposed of it will cause irreparable injury. Be that as it may, I feel that it will be sufficient if I.A No.1246 of 2018 is directed to be considered and disposed of at the earliest.

¶35

In the result, the original petition is disposed of directing the Munsiff's Court, Cherthala to hear and dispose of I.A No.1246 of 2018 as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to say that the said application shall be disposed of prior to the disposal of I.A No.1081 of 2018 pending on its files.

¶36

Sd/- Sathish Ninan, Judge.

¶37

vdv

V.N.Harold v. M.J.Joseph

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.N.Harold v. M.J.Joseph

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

Vijayan.K.G Vs Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd.

Martha Philipose Vs Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd.

Dr. Sherly Bhaskaran Vs Power Grid Corporation of India Limited

Sarojini Vs Prasadh

Ashraf Vs Methala Thiyya Marananthara Sahaya Samgham

K.a.Abdul Karim Vs Rejendraprasad