IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2008 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 8859 of 2008(D) ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 07/12/2007 IN IA. 6113 /2007 IN OS.685/2001 of III ADDL.SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER: ------------ VASUDEVAN PILLAI, S/O. KRISHNA PILLAI, SALEELA BUILDING, VYTTILA, COCHIN-19. BY ADV. SRI.JESWIN P.VARGHESE RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. TONY MATHEW, S/O. MATHEW, EDAYAZHATH HOUSE, KUMBALANGI, KOCHI. 2. ARAVINDAKSHA MENON, S/O. SANKARA MENON, SURABHI APARTMENTS, POONITHURA, VYTTILA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.8859 of 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of March, 2008 JUDGMENT This writ petition is preferred to set aside the order in I.A.No.6113/07 in O.S.No.685/01. 2. Here the plaintiff wants to incorporate an amendment by adding one sentence to the para 9 of the plaint as “subsequent to the execution of sham sale deed, on handing over the above cheque towards part portion of the payment of loan amount, the first respondent gave a receipt cum letter on 22.8.1998”. The court below on a discussion of the material found that there is a reference in that letter for re-conveyance of the property. But the suit is instituted on the above basis of an oral agreement which the plaintiff now wants to change it as something in writing. The court below found that such an amendment could not be allowed. But made it clear that the plaintiff can rely on the documents produced by them and the evidentiary value and genuineness of which will be determined on the basis of the evidence adduced by them. WPC 8859/08 2 3. I am conscious of the fact that in amendment of the pleadings, the courts have to be liberal. But that does not mean that the parties can be permitted to change their case according to their whims and fancies at any time they want. But the court can permit a party to produce documents and consider the same at the stage of evidence. I do not find any mistake committed by the court below and therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE csl