IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 27TH JULY 2009 / 5TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 20939 of 2009(O) -------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 17/06/2009 IN IA 414/09 & 415/09 IN OS.193/2006 of MUNSIFF COURT, TIRUR .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------------- MANCHEERI ILLATH DECEASED VASUDEVAN NAMBOODIRI'S SON NARAYANAN, KOTTAKKAL AMSOM AND DESOM, TIRUR TALUK, P.O. KOTTAKKAL, MALAPPURAM DIST. BY ADV. MR.P.CHANDRASEKHAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. MANCHERY ILLATH DECASED VASUDEVAN NAMBOODIRI'S SON SREEDHARA RAJAN, KOLAPULLI AMSOM DESOM, PO KOLAPULLI, OTTAPPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DIST. 2. MANCHERY ILLATH DECEASED VASUDEVAN NAMBOODIRI'S SON HARIDASAN, IRIMBLIYAM AMSOM DESOM, P.O.IRIMBILIYAM. 3. MANCHERY ILLATH DECEASED VASUDEVAN NAMBOODIRI'S SON RADHAKRISHNAN, THIRUVAGAPPURA AMSOM AND DESOM, OTTAPPALAM TALUK, TIRUVEGAPPURA P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 4. MANCHERY ILLATH DECEASED VASUDEVAN NAMBOODIRI'S DAUGHTER SOBHANA, W/O.THELAKKAT MANAKKAL MATHRUDATHAN, NJIALAKKURISSI, P.O. CHERPPULASSERI. 5. MANCHERY ILLATH DECEASED VASUDEVAN NAMBOODIRI'S DAUGHTER SUJATHA, W/O. ORAVAMBURATH MANAKKAL NARAYANAN, THACHINGANADAM, PO PATTIKKAD, PALAKKAD DIST. 6. MANCHERY ILLATH DECASED VASUDEVAN NAMBOODIRI'S SON VASUDEVAN, THIRUVEGAPPURA AMSOM AND DESOM , PO THIRUVEGAPPURA, OTTAPPALAM TALUK PALAKKAD DIST. WP(C).No. 20939 of 2009(O) 7. MANCHERY ILLATH DECEASED VASUDEVAN NAMBOODIRI'S SON HARISUTHAN, KOTTAKKAL ARYAVAIDYASALA FACTORY, KANCHIKODE, PO KANCHIKODE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 8. SREEDEVI ANTHARJANAM, W/O. MANCHEERI ILLATH VASUDEVAN NAMBOODIRI, ELAMBILAKKAT MANA,KARALMANNA VIA CHERPULASSERI OTTAPPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------- W.P.(C).No.20939 OF 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of July 2009 ------------------------------------- JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs. i) Call for the records leading to Exts. P2, P4, P6 and quash or set aside the same. ii) Direct the Court below to allow Ext.P3 and P4 applications of the petitioner in the interest of justice. iii) Grant such further relief as this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to grant on the facts and circumstances of the case. W.P.(C).No.20939 OF 2009 Page numbers 2. Petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S 193/2006 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Tirur. He filed Ext.P1 suit for a decree of mandatory injunction against the respondents in the petition. An illam, a place of worship, is set apart in common to all the members of the Tharavadu when partition was effected earlier, there was an agreement by all the members to contribute for the maintenance of that illam, and that promise was not complied with, was the basis of the claim in the suit to have a decree of mandatory injunction directing the defendants to provide contribution at the rate of Rs.50,000/- for maintenance of the illam. The defendants on appearance resisting the suit claim filed a petition challenging the maintainability of the suit. Petitioner thereupon moved an application for amendment of the plaint so as to convert the suit as one for partition and also for impleadment of additional party to claim that relief. The W.P.(C).No.20939 OF 2009 Page numbers application was objected to by the defendants by filing written objections. The learned Munsiff after hearing both sides dismissed that application under Ext.P6 order. Propriety and correctness of that order is challenged in the petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 3. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Having regard to the submissions made and taking note of the facts and circumstances presented with reference to Ext.P6 order and also other materials produced in the writ petition, I find no notice to the respondents is necessary and it is dispensed with. The learned Munsiff has dismissed the amendment application moved taking note the decree sought in the suit is only mandatory injunction, which is in personam against the defendants, and by amendment a decree for W.P.(C).No.20939 OF 2009 Page numbers partition is claimed that too by impleading additional parties which will alter and change the character of the suit. I do not find any impropriety or illegality in the reasoning so taken by the court below to hold that the amendment application is not entertainable. Petition is devoid of any merit, and it is dismissed. Sd/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE vdv