IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID TUESDAY, THE 17TH JUNE 2008 / 27TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 18058 of 2008(S) -------------------------- AGAIINST THE ORDER IN I.A. 3575/2007 IN OP.194/2006 of FAMILY COURT, ALAPPUZHA .................... PETITIONER: ------------ ABRAHAM VARGHESE, S/O.VARGHESE ABRAHAM, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS RESIDING AT PUTHENPURAIL HOUSE PAVUKKARA KARA, KURATTISSERY VILLAGE, CHENGANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.K.J.GEORGE KUNNUMPURATH SRI.JOHN JOSEPH(ROY) RESPONDENTS: ------------- NISHA ABRAHAM, D/O.ZACHARIAH, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, RESIDING AT VATTAPARAMBIL HOUSE, THITTAMEL KARA, CHENGANNUR. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. ------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.18058 of 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of June 2008 JUDGMENT Harun-Ul-Rashid ,J The petitioner herein is the 1st respondent in I.A. No. 3575/2007 in O.P No. 194/2006 on the file of the Family Court Alappuzha. I.A. No. 3575/2007 was filed by the Petitioner in O.P 194/2006 for amending 'C' relief to the plaint. The amendment sought for is to insert a prayer to recover interest at the rate of 24% on the amount due from the petitioner Ext.P3 is the amendment application. The petitioner herein filed Ext.P4 objection. The Family court after hearing both sides passed Ext.P5 order allowing the amendment application. 2. The petitioner opposed Ext.P5 order stating that it is a non- speaking order and was passed without considering Ext.P4 objection. It is also contended that the amendment sought for, will change the nature and character of the suit and if allowed,it will result in miscarriage of justice. 3. We have gone through Ext.P3 petition for amendment . The amendment sought for is the insertion of a claim for interest at the rate of 24% from the petitioner. The amendment proposed, cannot and will not W.P.(C) No. 18058 of 2008 -2- change the nature and character of the suit, nor would it cause any prejudice to the writ petitioner or other respondents in the original petition If such an amendment is not permitted it would lead to multiplicity of proceedings. Therefore the amendment is legal, valid and proper. Therefore this writ petition challenging the said order is without any merit and accordingly dismissed. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE es