IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 18TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 29TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 27125 of 2008(D) -------------------------- {OP(ELE.)NO.7/2005 OF THE II ADDL. MUNSIFF'S COURT, TRIVANDRUM} .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- SUMATHI, D/O.APPIPENNU, RESIDING AT VATTAVILA VEEDU, MUTTACAUD, VENGANOOR VILLAGE, MUTTACAUD DESOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.B.PRADEEP RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. T.SOBHANA THULASI, D/O.THANKAMMA, RESIDING AT ANEESH BHAVAN, VAVVAMOOLA, VENGANOOR VILLAGE, VENNIYOOR DESOM, NELLIVILA.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. T.NALINI, D/O.THAMARAKSHY, RESIDING AT BETHAL VILAKOM, MUTTACAUD.P.O, VENGANOOR VILLAGE, MUTTACAUD DESOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 27125 of 2008 :: 2 :: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE AMENDMENT APPLICATION DATED 7.11.2007 O.P.(ELECTION) NO.7/2005 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 16.1.2008 IN EXT.P1. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21.6.2008 PASSED IN EXT.P1 APPLICATION. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL //true copy// P.S. To Judge SK/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.27125 of 2008 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of February, 2010 JUDGMENT Writ petitioner is the elected candidate from Ward No.2 of Venganoor Grama Panchayat in the general election held in 2005. His election was challenged by the 1st respondent by filing an election petition before the Munsiff's Court, Thiruvananthapuram. While the trial was in progress, an application for amending the election petition was moved by the 1st respondent to incorporate some allegations and also to seek an additional relief. Ext.P1 is the copy of that amendment application. Though the petitioner/respondent in the election petition filed Ext.P2 objections resisting that application, learned Munsiff allowed the amendment by Ext.P3 order. Propriety and correctness of Ext.P3 order is challenged in the writ petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. W.P.(C) No.27125 of 2008 :: 2 :: 2. Though notice was issued to the respondents, after service none of them has entered appearance. 3. I heard the counsel for the petitioner. 4. From the submission made, it is clear that trial of the election petition is in progress. Though in the writ petition an interim stay was granted staying the trial, that order admittedly is not now in force. When the trial has already commenced and the amendment allowed carried out, I find, it may not be proper and appropriate for this court at this stage to examine Ext.P3 order on its merits. It will be open to the petitioner to impeach the acceptability of the additional pleadings raised for in the election petition on the basis of Ext.P3 amendment in trial, provided such amendment is impermissible under law by any of the provisions of the Panchayat Act. 5. Reserving the right of the petitioner to challenge the correctness of the amended pleadings as indicated above, and W.P.(C) No.27125 of 2008 :: 3 :: also to file an additional written statement to the extent election petition is amended, within a period of two weeks from the date of this judgment, if such additional written statement has not been filed so far writ petition is closed. Send a copy of this judgment to the court concerned and hand over a copy to the petitioner on usual terms. Sd/- (S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN) JUDGE SK/- //true copy//