IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 25TH AUGUST 2009 / 3RD BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 34851 of 2008(Y) -------------------------- OS.51/2006 of SUB COURT, HOSDURG .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ K. KUNHAMBU, AGED 59 YEARS, S/O. K. KUNHIRAMAN, R/AT KUTTIKOL, KUTTIKOLE VILLAGE AND POST, KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.KODOTH SREEDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- AJANUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.O. AJANOOR, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD. BY ADV. MR.T.K.VIPINDAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.34851 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 25th August, 2009 JUDGMENT The Writ Petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: 1. To call for the records in relation to the entire proceedings in Ext.P3 and issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order quashing it. 2. To issue a writ of mandamus directing the court below to rehear the question of preliminary objection raised by the petitioner as per Ext.P3. 3. To issue an order of stay of all further proceedings in O.S.51/2006 of the Subordinate Judge, Hosdurg. 4. Any other appropriate writ, order or direction as the Hon'ble Court may pleased to grant in the circumstances of the case. 2. The Writ Petition is filed by the plaintiff in O.S.No.51 of 2006 on the file of the Sub Court, Hosdurg. Suit was filed for settlement of accounts relating to a work contract with the defendant, a Grama Panchayat. Resisting the suit claim, among other contentions, the defendant contended that valuation of the suit was not correct and court fee paid inadequate. A preliminary issue was raised as to the correctness of the valuation made and sufficiency of the court fee W.P.C.No.34851/08 - 2 - paid. After hearing both sides, the court below passed P3 order upholding the contention raised by the defendant entering a finding that the estimated value of Rs.Two lakhs made by the plaintiff to sustain the reliefs claimed in the suit was not correct and unacceptable. Challenging the propriety and correctness of P3 order, the Writ Petition is filed invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 3. At the time of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner may be allowed to withdraw the petition with liberty to file an amendment petition so as to claim actual amount due on the work performed from the defendant. It is submitted that as per the decision in Varghese v. K.S.E.B. (2001(2) KLT 627) rendered by this court, a suit originally filed for accounting on setting up a case that there was a breach of contract can be amended to a claim of specified sum by way of damages. Having regard to the submissions made by the counsel on both sides and also taking note of the facts and circumstances presented, I find permission sought for by the petitioner has to be granted and it is ordered accordingly. The Writ Petition is closed as withdrawn reserving the right of the petitioner to seek amendment of the plaint W.P.C.No.34851/08 - 3 - as suggested and directing the court below to consider the amendment in accordance with law and to decide the question of valuation and court fee on the basis of the amendment, if it is found allowable under law. srd S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE