FATHIMA BEEVI
BALASUBRAMANIAN – Appellant
Versus
NARAYANAN NAIR – Respondent
1. The revision petitioner is the defendant in O. S.113 or 1976 pending before the Munsiff's Court, Palghat. The revision is directed against the order dated 17-8-1984 allowing the plaintiff's application for amendment of the plaint, under 0.6 R.17, C, P. C.
2. The suit as originally framed was one for perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from trespassing into the property, as the right of the defendant as a tenant arose for determination in the suit. That question was referred for the decision of the Land Tribunal concerned. The Land Tribunal answered the reference against the defendant. The plaintiff thereafter filed I. A. 1225 of 1984 on 31-7-1984 for leave to amend the plaint. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant trespassed into the property, after the suit. The plaintiff by amendment sought recovery of possession of the property. Consequent to the amendment proposed, the valuation of the suit was also sought to be amended. The suit instituted in 1976 was originally valued at Rs. 450/. The amended valuation was Rs. 14,650/. The Court below allowed the application for amendment overruling the objections of the defendant. Being aggrieved the defendant has
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.