Kerala High Court
St.Mary'S Syrian Jacobite Church vs Nil
Author: P. Bhavadasan
Bench: P.Bhavadasan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN
FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2014/2ND PHALGUNA, 1935
OP(C).No. 471 of 2014 (O)
------------------------------------
[AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30/01/2014 IN I.A. NO.14/2014 IN O.S. NO.28/2013
ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, KOLENCHERRY]
............
PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS NO.3 TO 6/DEFENDANTS NO.3 TO 6:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. ST.MARY'S SYRIAN JACOBITE CHURCH,
PAZHAMTHOTTAM, AIKKARANADU NORTH VILLAGE,
KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY THE TRUSTEE P.M.JACOB
2. P.M.YACOB,
S/O.MATHAI, PADIPURACKAL HOUSE, PAZHAMTHOTTAM P.O.,
KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
3. K.P.ABRAHAM,
S/O.LATE PAILY, KURUVICHIRANGARA HOUSE, KAITHAKKADU,
PATTIMATTOM P.O, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
4. FR.SHAJI VARGHESE,
S/O.VARGHESE, PARAKKADAN HOUSE, OORAKKADU KARA,
KIZHAKKAMBALAM POST,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.SAJAN VARGHEESE .K,
SRI.LIJU. M.P.
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS NO.1 & 2/PLAINTIFF &
DEFENDANTS NO.1 & 2:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. PAUL VARGHESE,
S/O.VARGHESE, KURUVICHIRANGARA HOUSE, KAITHAKKADU,
PATTIMATTOM P.O, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 683 562.
2. BASELIOUS THOMAS.I,
S/O.LATE MATHU, CATHOLICOS, PATRIARCHAL CENTRE,
PUTHENCRUEZ P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 682 308.
Prv.
O.P(C).NO.471/2014-O:
3. JACOBITE SYRIAN CHTISTIAN CHURCH,
HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT PATRIARCHAL CENTRE,
PUTHENCRUEZ P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
REP. BY BASELIOUS THOMAS.I, CATHOLICOSE - 682 308.
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 21-02-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Prv.
O.P(C).NO.471/2014-O:
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1: COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S NO.28/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE
MUNSIFF'S COURT, KOLENCHERRY.
EXHIBIT P2: COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED IN EXT.P1 SUIT.
EXHIBIT P3: COPY OF THE IA NO.14/2014 IN EXT.P1 SUIT.
EXHIBIT P4: COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED TO EXT.P3
INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION.
EXHIBIT P5: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30/1/2014 PASSED IN IA NO. 14/2014 IN
OS NO. 28/2013 ON THE FILE OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, KOLENCHERRY.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE.
Prv.
P. BHAVADASAN, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
O.P.(C) No. 471 of 2014
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 21st day of February, 2014
JUDGMENT
Relying on the decisions reported in Arjun Singh v. Mohindra Kumar (AIR1964 SC 993) and Mohammed Kunhi v. Janaki Amma (1999(2) K.L.J. 1021), learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contends that having filed an application on an earlier occasion for the very same relief of amendment of the plaint, and having got it withdrawn, the subsequent application for the very same purpose amounts to abuse of the process of court.
2. Those two decisions are on the basis of the facts in those cases. In the case on hand, it is true that the respondents have earlier moved an application for amendment of the plaint. For reasons best known to them, they chose to withdraw the said application. It is not shown that any orders on merits had been passed on that application. OPC.471/2014. 2
3. A subsequent application was filed for the very same purpose and the court below found that the application is entertainable and that amendment is necessary for a just decision of the case. That finding of the court below has been arrived at after application of mind to the facts of the case and there is nothing to show that the finding so entered into is erroneous either on facts or in law. No harm or prejudice is caused to the petitioners herein and none of their rights are affected.
This original petition is without merits and it is accordingly dismissed.
P. BHAVADASAN, JUDGE sb.