IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2010 / 30TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 1142 of 2010(O) ------------------------------------- IA.2785/2009 IN OS.371/2004 of MUNSIFF COURT, ATTINGAL .................... PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- BABU, S/O. RAMAKRISHNAN, RESIDING AT ARAPPURA VEEDU, MANJADIMOODU DESOM, CHIRAYINKEEZHU, SARKARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. MR.R.S.KALKURA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. ANIRUDHAN, S/O.VISWANATHAN, 'SUMANGALI' VILASOM, KARAKKADA.P.O, KIZHUVILOM VILLAGE. 2. SUMAN, D/O.SUBHADRA, 'SUMANGALI' VILASOM, KARAKKADA.P.O, KIZHUVILOM VILLAGE. 3. SAJAYAN, S/O. ASOKAN, RESIDING AT ASHOKA BHAVAN, AZHOOR, CHIRAYINKEEZH TALUK. R1 BY ADV. MR.BABU KARUKAPADATH, SMT.M.A.VAHEEDA BABU, MR.P.G.PRAMOD , MR.KANDAMPULLY RAHUL, THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/01/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.1142 OF 2010 -------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of January 2010 ---------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT Writ petition is filed by the plaintiff in O.S No.371 of 2004 on the file of Munsiff Court, Attingal challenging Ext.P11 order passed by the learned Munsiff declining the request of the petitioner/plaintiff for amendment of the plaint. At the time of hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner confined his submissions to seek for a direction/order to the court below to consider a fresh application by the petitioner/plaintiff to rectify plaint 'C' schedule for correcting and supplementing the survey sub division numbers, as noted in the commission report, untrammelled by Ext.P11 order challenged in the petition. It is submitted that this court while disposing of a previous writ petition by Ext.P8 judgment has held that an opportunity has to be given to the plaintiff to correct the mistake in the sub division numbers in 'C' schedule in tune with the report and W.P.(C).No.1142 OF 2010 Page numbers plan prepared by the advocate commissioner. However, before the court below, it was canvassed as if a larger right was conferred on the petitioner to carry out drastic amendments in the plaint. But the court below after examining that application in the light of the objections filed by the respondent had turned down that amendment application under Ext.P11 order. The dismissal of the amendment application by Ext.P11 order should not cause prejudice to the plaintiff in correcting 'C' schedule as permitted by this court is the submission of the counsel. The learned counsel for the respondent has also no objection in giving an opportunity to the plaintiff to move an application limited to the purpose of correcting 'C' schedule by incorporating sub division numbers as noted in the commission report irrespective of Ext.P11 order, but, subject to a further direction for speedy trial and disposal of the suit. Considering the submissions made as above by the counsel on both sides, I direct the court below to provide an opportunity to the plaintiff to move a fresh application for W.P.(C).No.1142 OF 2010 Page numbers the limited purpose of carrying out the corrections in 'C' schedule to supplement the survey sub division numbers, that alone, to have a description of that schedule in tune with the report of the advocate commissioner. The court below is also directed to dispose the suit as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, before the closing of the courts for the mid summer vacation. Subject to the above directions, writ petition is disposed. Sd/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE vdv