AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The court below has by the order impugned disallowed an application for amendment of the plaint in a suit for recovery of possession on title. The plaintiffs wanted to correct the description of the property in the plaint ''B'', ''c'', and ''D'' schedule to be in tune with the report and plan of the Advocate Commissioner. The order of remand in A.S. No. 520/1998 by this Court shows that the trial court has been directed to consider the suit afresh in accordance with law. It is an open remand and not a restricted remand so as to disable the trial court to allow the application for amendment of the plaint as sought.
The amendment was sought to adjudicate the real dispute in controversy in the suit by correcting the misdescription of the property in the plaint schedule. The court below erred under the circumstances in rejecting the application for amendment of plaint on the premise that the order of remand does not permit so.
The question whether the amended relief could be granted or not is altogether a different aspect. That is a matter to be decided by the trial court finally after affording the defendants an opportunity to file an additional written statement to the amended plaint. It is also open to the defendants to raise the question of limitation therein. The impugned order is set aside and I.A. No. 3421/2012 in O.S. No. 540/1995 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Kozhikode is allowed. This is subject to the condition that the plaintiffs pay a sum of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) as costs to the Counsel for the first respondent in this original petition. The costs shall be paid within a period of one month from today failing which the impugned order will remain intact.
The Original Petition (civil) is disposed of.