Manoj v. Jobin
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court of Kerala set aside the trial court's order allowing amendment to the plaint schedule. The Court held the amendment was unsustainable as it contradicted title deed recitals and property was not in plaintiff's possession, directing expediting disposal of the 20-year-old suit.
What did the court decide?
The impugned order allowing amendment of survey numbers in I.A. No.108/2020 was set aside; suit directed to be disposed within one month.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JULY 2024 / 3RD SRAVANA, 1946
OP(C) NO. 304 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 11.03.2020 IN I.A.NO.108/2020 IN OS NO.179 OF 1995 OF MUNSIFF COURT, IDUKKI
ORIGINAL PETITIONER/2nd RESPONDENT/2 nd DEFENDANT:
MANOJ AGED 51 YEARS S/O. KRISHNANKUTTY, OLIANICKAL HOUSE, KAMBILIKANDOM KARA, KONNATHADY VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK. BY ADVS. K.G.CLEETUS SRI.PETERLAL
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER 3rd TO 7 th RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFF - 3 rd TO 7th ADDITIONAL DEFENDANT:
1 JOBIN, S/O JOSE,MUNDIYANKAL HOUSE, KAMBILIKANDAM KARA, KONNATHADY VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK, UDUMBANCHOLA P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 554.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the trial court was justified in allowing an amendment to substitute survey numbers in the plaint schedule against the petitioner's objection.
Whether the suit involving property dispute requiring expeditious disposal given its age.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Manoj
- respondent
Jobin
- respondent
Annamma Varghese
- respondent
Chinnamma Philip
- respondent
Jancy Emerson
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court