IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 24TH AUGUST 2009 / 2ND BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 2375 of 2009(G) --------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN IA 2000/2008 IN OS.312/2006 of PRL.MUNSIFF'S COURT, KOZHIKODE-II .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- N.JAYANANDAN, S/O.LATE SANKARAN, NADUVICHALIL HOUSE, P.O.KARANTHUR, KUNNAMANGALAM AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKKODE DIST. BY ADVS.MR.K.P.SUDHEER SMT.P.JAYALAKSHMI RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. MARKAZ SSAQUAFTHI SUNNIYA, KARANTHUR, KUNNAMANGALAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, A.P.ABOOBACKER MUSLIYAR, S/O.AMMED HAJI, KOYILANDY AMSOM, UNNIKULAM DESOM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. T.K.KUNHAMMED HAJEE, S/O.KARUTHICHALIL PAREEKUTTI HAJI, TREASURER, MARKAZ SSAQUAFTHISSUNNIYA, KODUVALLY AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 3. FASAL POOKOYA THANGAL, PRESIDENT, JIFRI HOUSE, THANGALS ROAD, KARKAZ SSAQUAFATHI SUNNIYA, KARANTHUR AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKKODE DISTRICT. R1 TO R3 BY ADVS.MR.N.SUBRAMANIAM , MR.M.S.NARAYANAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.2375/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS. NO.312/2006 DT. 21.7.06 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF'S COURT-II, KOZHIKODE. P2:- COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT DTD. 2.8.06 IN OS. NO.312/06 FLED BEFORE THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF'S COURT-II, KOZHIKODE. P3:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 18.7.07 IN CMA. 32/07 PASSED BY DISTRICT COURT, KOZHIKODE. P4:- COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 29.9.08 IN CRL.PETITION NO.3/08 PASSED BY PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF'S COURT-II, KOZHIKODE. P5:- COPY OF THE IA. NO.2000/08 IN OS. NO.312/06 DTD. 12.6.08 BEFORE THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF'S COURT-II, KOZHIKODE. P6:- COPY OF THE COUNTER STATEMENT IN IA. NO.2000/08 DTD. 16.6.08 IN OS. NO.312/06 BEFORE THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF'S COURT -II, KOZHIKODE P7:- COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 18.12.08 IN IA. NO.2000/08 IN OS. NO.312/06 PASSED BY PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF'S COURT-II, KOZHIKODE. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE tss S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.2375 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 24th August, 2009 JUDGMENT The Writ Petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: 1. To call for the records leading to Ext.P7 and quash Ext.P7 by issuing a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction. 2. To issue such other writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. Petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.No.312 of 2006 on the file of the Principal Munsiff Court-II, Kozhikode. Suit is for injunction and the respondents are the defendants. Resisting the suit claim the defendants filed a written written statement in which the extent of the property in their possession was shown as 2.8 cents, but later by moving an amendment it was corrected as 2.08 cents. The order passed by the learned Munsiff allowing the amendment vide P7 order is challenged in the Writ Petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 3. I heard the counsel on both sides. At the time of hearing learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had taken proceedings under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C. and it is now W.P.C.No.2375/09 - 2 - pending in appeal before the Sessions Court, imputing that the defendants committed forgery over a document after its production before the court. That being so, the petitioner apprehends that the allowing of the amendment application vide P7 order may affect the merit of his appeal which is awaiting consideration. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the proceedings moved under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C. was negatived by the learned Munsiff vide P4 order after taking note of all relevant circumstances and the respondents have not received any notice of the criminal appeal which is filed by the petitioner. Whatever that be, I find no merit in the apprehension raised by the petitioner that by virtue of P7 order passed by the court below allowing the amendment in the written statement, the proceedings taken by the petitioner pending in appeal under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C. is likely to be affected. The question whether proceedings under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C. has to be proceeded against the respondents depends on different facts and circumstances which has no relevance with the allowing of the amendment of their written statement, and so much so, there is no merit in the apprehension raised by the learned counsel. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the suit being of the year W.P.C.No.2375/09 - 3 - 2006, the court below may be directed to dispose the suit at the earliest. I direct the learned Munsiff to give the suit top priority in the hearing and dispose it as expeditiously as possible, after affording reasonable opportunities to both sides to lead evidence in support of their respective case. Subject to the above observation/direction, the Writ Petition is closed. srd S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE