Sheeba Vasudevan v. Gopi
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court allowed an application for amendment of the plaint to substitute the money claim based on an expert commission report, setting aside the lower court’s dismissal order, provided the plaintiffs pay costs to the respondent.
What did the court decide?
Order impugned set aside; amendment allowed subject to payment of Rupees 25,000 as costs within ten days.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN
MONDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 14TH MAGHA, 1941
OP(C).No.14 OF 2020
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 17.12.2019 IN IA 3107/2019 IN OS 177/2015 OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, WADAKKANCHERY
PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS/PLAINTIFFS:
1 SHEEBA VASUDEVAN, AGED 38 YEARS, W/O ADIYAMPURATH VASUDEVAN, P.O.VENGANELLUR DESOM, VENGANALLUR VILLAGE,THALAPPILLY TALUK, AND D/O KAPPURUVEETTIL BHARGAVIAMMA,PRESENTLY RESIDING AT SREELAKAM,KILLANNOOR VILLAGE,MULAKUNNATHUKAVU DESOM.P.O,MULAKKUNNATHKAVU, THRISSUR DIST-680581.
2 VASUDEVAN, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O ADIYAMPURATH RAGHAVAN, P.O.VENGANELLUR DESOM, VENGANALLUR VILLAGE,THALAPPILLY TALUK,AND PRESENTLY RESIDING AT SREELAKAM, KILLANNOOR VILLAGE, MULAKUNNATHKAVU DESOM.P.O,MULAKKUNATHKAVU, THRISSUR DIST-680581.
BY ADVS. SRI.M.R.VENUGOPAL SMT.DHANYA P.ASHOKAN SMT.RANJANA V.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an application for amendment of the plaint to align money claim with an expert commission report should be allowed at the stage of trial despite potential loss of court jurisdiction.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Sheeba Vasudevan and Another
- respondent
Gopi
Coram
Sathish Ninan
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court