Secretary vs Sunilkumar

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jun 04, 2024

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1326949

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1326949
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath
Decided On: Jun 04, 2024
Case Number: OP(C)/1187/2024

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Secretary

Respondent

Sunilkumar

Excerpt

.....the trial court allowed the application as per ext.p5 order. challenging the said order, this original petition has been filed.4. heard both sides.5. the suit is against the panchayat. the panchayat has- : 3 :- to be represented by its secretary, instead the secretary has been shown as the defendant. in the affidavit filed in support of i.a.no.7 of 2024, the plaintiff has asserted that it is only a typographical error. though this application has been filed after the commencement of the trial, considering the fact that the amendment sought is only to correct a typographical error and that it will not alter the nature and character of the suit, the trial court was justified in allowing the amendment application. i find no reason to interfere with the impugned order. accordingly, the original petition is dismissed. sd/- dr.kauser edappagath, judge as - : 4 :- appendix of op(c) 1187/2024 petitioner exhibits exhibit p1 true copy of the plaint in os.no.353/2020 filed before the munsiff court irinjalakuda dated nil june 2020 exhibit p2 true copy of the written statement in os.no.352/2020 filed by the petitioner dated nil. exhibit p3 true copy of ia.no.7/2024 in os.353/2020 filed before the munsiff court irinjalakuda dated 1.3.2024 exhibit p4 true copy of objection filed by the petitioner in ia.no.7/2023 in os.353/2020 dated 5.3.2024 exhibit p5 true copy of the order of the munsiff' court, irinjalakuda in ia.7 of 2024 in os.353/2020 dated 26.03.2024exhibit p6 true copy of the order of the deputy director, local self government department, thrissur, order no. lsgd/jd/tsr/1014/2023 - a11 dated10.05.2024

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH TUESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 14TH JYAISHTA, 1946 OS NO.353 OF 2020 OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT ,IRINJALAKUDA PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT: SECRETARY KARALAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH GRAMAPANCHAYATH OFFICE, KARALAM, KARALAM.P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680711 BY ADVS. V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR P.R.REENA RESPONDENT/PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF: SUNILKUMAR AGED 51 YEARS S/O KATTUNGAL BALAN, KUTTOOR.P.O, ILLIKKAD DESOM, KARALAM VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680013 THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: - : 2 :-

JUDGMENT

Exhibit-P5 order allowing the amendment application filed under Order 6 Rule 17 of Code of Civil Procedure (for short, the 'CPC') is under challenge in this original petition.

2. The petitioner is the defendant and the respondent is the plaintiff in O.S.No.353 of 2020 on the files of the Munsiff Court, Irinjalakuda (for short, 'the trial court').

3. The suit is one for permanent prohibitory injunction

against the defendant Panchayat. In the cause title, the defendant has been shown as “Secretary, Karalam Grama Panchayat”. After the commencement of the trial, the plaintiff filed I.A.No.7 of 2024 to amend the cause title as “Karalam Grama Panchayat represented by its Secretary”. The trial court allowed the application as per Ext.P5 order. Challenging the said order, this original petition has been filed.

4. Heard both sides.

5. The suit is against the Panchayat. The Panchayat has

- : 3 :- to be represented by its Secretary, instead the Secretary has been shown as the defendant. In the affidavit filed in support of I.A.No.7 of 2024, the plaintiff has asserted that it is only a typographical error. Though this application has been filed after the commencement of the trial, considering the fact that the amendment sought is only to correct a typographical error and that it will not alter the nature and character of the suit, the trial court was justified in allowing the amendment application. I find no reason to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, the original petition is dismissed. Sd/- DR.KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, JUDGE AS - : 4 :- APPENDIX OF OP(C) 1187/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS.NO.353/2020 FILED BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT IRINJALAKUDA DATED NIL JUNE 2020 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT IN OS.NO.352/2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED NIL. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF IA.NO.7/2024 IN OS.353/2020 FILED BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT IRINJALAKUDA DATED 1.3.2024 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN IA.NO.7/2023 IN OS.353/2020 DATED 5.3.2024 EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE MUNSIFF' COURT, IRINJALAKUDA IN IA.7 OF 2024 IN OS.353/2020 DATED 26.03.2024

EXHIBIT P6            TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE DEPUTY
                      DIRECTOR,    LOCAL    SELF   GOVERNMENT
                      DEPARTMENT,    THRISSUR,   ORDER    NO.
                      LSGD/JD/TSR/1014/2023    -  A11   DATED

10.05.2024

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2024 Same Parties Secretary vs Sunilkumar Same Judge Honourable Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath