JUDGMENT

Plaintiff in O.S.No.26 of 2007 of the Court of learned Munsiff, Karunagappally is the petitioner before me challenging Ext.P5, order allowing amendment of counter claim pleaded in the written statement of the first respondent. Petitioner filed the suit for fixation of boundary of plaint C schedule. Petitioner averred that so far as plaint C schedule is concerned, first respondent is claiming some right. First respondent filed written statement and a counter claim seeking fixation of boundary of 19cents (referred to in the plaint C schedule). Later, first respondent filed Ext.P3, application for amendment of written statement to incorporate a claim for partition of plaint C schedule (which was scheduled in the counter claim filed by the first respondent). That application for amendment was allowed by the learned Munsiff by Ext.P5, order. That order is under challenge.

2. Learned counsel submits that the first respondent has no partible right or interest in the plaint C schedule and hence the prayer to incorporate claim for partition ought not have been allowed.

3. The question whether first respondent has any partible right in plaint C schedule is not a matter to be taken into