AMMINI K.S v. THANKAPPAN
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 06 Feb 2007
- Bench
- M SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, NAMBIAR M SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 227
Judgment
BY ADV. SRI.M.NARENDRA KUMAR SMT.LEENA KRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: -------------
THANKAPPAN, KURINJIPURAYIDOM, MUTTAPPALLY P.O., 40 ACRE, ERUMELY VILLAGE, ERUMELY SOUTH.
THANKAMMA, KURINJIPURAYIDOM, MUTTAPPALLY P.O., 40 ACRE, ERUMELY VILLAGE, ERUMELY SOUTH.
SUBU GEORGE, VATTAMTHOTTIYIL HOUSE, KARIKKATTOOR MURI, MANIMALA VILLAGE.
LEELAMMA, KAVUNKAL HOUSE, KANNIMALA MURI, ERUMELY VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.LIJI.J.VADAKEDOM FOR R1 to R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/02/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX Ext.P1:- A true copy of the plaint O.S. No.37 of 2004 in the Court of Munsiff Kanjirappally. Ext.P2:- True copy of the I.A.No.829/05 in O.S.37 of 2004 dated 17.01.2005. Ext.P3:- True copy of the objections filed by the 3rd respondent dated 8.3.04. Ext.P4:- True copy of the order dated 12.8.2005 dismissing I.A.No.829 of 2005 in O.S.No.37 of 2004. /true copy/ P.S. To Judge M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== W.P.(C) NO.19641 OF 2006 =========================== Dated this the 6th day of February 2007 JUDGMENT This petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India challenging Ext.P4 order dismissing an application filed under Order VI Rule 17 of Civil Procedure Code to amend the plaint in O.S.37/04 on the file of Munsiff Court, Kanjirappally. It is reported that O.S.37/04 was dismissed on 19.12.
Hence this Writ Petition also dismissed. tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 227.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Kerala High Court, on 06 Feb 2007. The bench was M SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, NAMBIAR M SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.