IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 16TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 25TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 27567 of 2008(F) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 21/08/2008 IN IA 5158/07 IN OS.344/2004 of I ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER: ------------ 1. KHADEEJA, D.NO. 12/769, KUZHIVELIPADY, EDATHALA SOUTH P.O., ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. AAYSHA MUHAMMED, D. NO.12/769, KUZHIVELIPADY, EDATHALA SOUTH P.O., ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. IBRAHIM MOHAMMED, D. NO.12/769, KUZHIVELIPADY, EDATHALA SOUTH P.O., ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. ARIFA MOHAMMED,D. NO.12/769, KUZHIVELIPADY, EDATHALA SOUTH P.O., ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. REP BY IBRAHIM MOHAMMED (BROTHER). BY ADV. SRI.K.L.VARGHESE SMT.SANTHA VARGHESE SRI.APPU JOSEPH RESPONDENTS: ------------- THE KERALA POLICE HOUSING AND CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION LTD., WHEEL HOUSE, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 014, REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * W.P.(C) No. 27567 of 2008 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dated: 16-09-2008 JUDGMENT Heard both sides. 2. The petitioners are the mother and children of one K.E. Kunju Mohammed, the original plaintiff in O.S. 344 of 2004 on the file of the I Addl. Sub Judge, Thiruvananthapuram. The said suit filed by K.E. Kunju Mohammed was one for recovery of a sum of Rs. 14,49,282/- from the Kerala Police Housing and Construction Corporation Limited with interest thereon. After the death of the original plaintiff the petitioners, four in number, were impleaded as his legal representatives and addl. plaintiffs 2 to 5. At a stage after the framing of issues the petitioners filed I.A. 5158 of 2007 under order VI Rule 17 C.P.C. seeking an amendment of the plaint restricting the claim under the final bill to Rs. 2,79,043 as against Rs. 8,48,782/- . The said application was opposed and dismissed as per the impugned order dated 21-8-2008 holding inter alia that the said prayer if allowed would adversely affect the counter claim made by the defendant Corporation. 3. After hearing both sides, I see no reason why the prayer of the petitioners should not have been granted by the court below. W.P.(C) No. 27567 of 2008 -:2:- Probably, the petitioners have a feeling that they would be unable to give evidence in support of the claim for the entire amount of Rs. 8,48,782/- That may be reason why they were restricting the claim to Rs. 2,79,043. The petitioners were entitled to do so. By allowing the said application for amendment the court was not granting a decree but only permitting the pleadings to be amended. It goes without saying that upon such amendment of the plaint the defendant will have further opportunity to file additional written statement and the suit as well as the counter claim will have to proceed according to law. Hence, the impugned order so far as it has refused the amendment of the plaint is set aside . The said application for amendment will stand allowed. The respondent Corporation can file an additional written statement within the time granted by the court below. Parties shall appear before the court below without any further notice on 24-09-2008. This Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Dated this the 16th day of September 2008. Sd/-V.Ramkumar, Judge. ani. /true copy/