IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN THURSDAY, THE 4TH MARCH 2010 / 13TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 31627 of 2008(M) ---------------------------------------- O.S. NO.1193/2007 OF MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM. ........... PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- PAVITHRAN, S/O.LATE THEVAN, AGED 58, NEDUKATTAIL HOUSE, PONNARIMANGALAM, MULAVUKADU P.O., KANAYANNUR TALUK, MULAVUKADU VILLAGE. BY ADV. MR.S.SREEKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. RAJAN, S/O.LATE KESAVAN, AGED ABOUT 52, NEDUKATTIL, PONNARIMANGALAM, MULAVUKAD P.O. 2. OMANA, D/O.LATE KESAVAN, AGED ABOUT 43, NEDUKATTIL, PONNARIMANGALAM, MULAVUKAD P.O. 3. SATHYAN, S/O.LATE KESAVAN, AGED ABOUT 37, NEDUKATTIL, PONNARIMANGALAM, MULAVUKAD P.O. R1 TO R3 BY ADV. MR.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/03/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 31627/2008-M APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXTP1: COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S. NO.1193/2007 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, ERNAKULAM. EXTP2: COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.5075/1993. EXTP3: COPY OF THE I.A. NO.2331/2008 IN O.S. NO.1193/2007 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, ERNAKULAM. EXTP4: COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED IN I.A. NO.2331/2008 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM. EXTP5: COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A. NO.2331/08 PASSED BY THE MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs. P. BHAVADASAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(.C). No. 31627 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 4th day of March, 2010. JUDGMENT In this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner challenges Ext.P5 order whereby his application for amendment of the plaint was dismissed. 2. The suit was one for declaration of title over plaint B schedule property. Copy of the plaint is produced as Ext.P1. It is averred that late Kesavan was the owner of plaint A schedule property having an extent of 48 cents, which he had obtained as per Document No.776 of 1107 ME. He has three brothers, Thevan, Raman and Arjunan. It is unnecessary to go into the further details in the light of the order that is sought to be passed in this petition. 3. It is averred that plaint A schedule property was partitioned into four in east-west direction. But later it was found that the partition was not in east-west WPC.1627/2008. 2 direction, and the petitioner filed an amendment petition, ie., I.A. 2331 of 2008. The court below dismissed the petition holding that it will change the nature of the property. 4. One is unable to understand how the nature of the property will be changed. All that might happen is a slight change of boundaries and that may not have much relevance in the issue involved in the suit. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent pointed out that the suit is included in the list and the respondent has no objection in allowing the amendment and they do not wish to file additional written statement. In the light of the above fact this writ petition is allowed, the impugned order, Ext.P5 is set aside and I.A.2331 of 2008 is allowed. The trial of the suit shall go on as per schedule. P. BHAVADASAN, JUDGE sb.