SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 10394

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
T.R.RAVI, J
UNAISE – Appellant
Versus
UMMER – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: P.VIJAYAKUMAR, C.R.REGHUNATHAN, B.HARRYLAL
For the Respondents: JESWIN P.VARGHESE

JUDGMENT

The original petition has been filed challenging an order whereby the petitioner was denied an opportunity to file an additional written statement. This is a case where the amendment of the plaint was permitted at the stage of proof affidavit and it is submitted that the petitioner was not permitted to file an additional written statement to the amended plaint. The matter has been pending before this Court from 10.01.2025 and no useful purpose will be served by retaining this original petition in this Court for the reason that time was not granted for filing an additional written statement. The parties are entitled to file their objections or additional written statements as and when there is an amendment carried out. As such, there is no reason why the petitioner should be denied such reliefs.

In the above circumstances, this original petition is allowed. The court below shall grant permission to the petitioner to file a written statement within six weeks from today. The trial shall proceed thereafter. The parties to appear before the court below on 25.02.2026.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top