(1.) EXT .P1, order dated 04.10.2002 on I.A.No.2903 of 2002 in O.S.No.266 of 1999 of the III Additional Sub Court, Kozhikode refusing amendment of the plaint to incorporate paragraph 9(a) is under challenge in this original petition.
(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioners, the suit properties originally belonged to palalam tarwad. The common ancestor - Amina had two children by name, Sara and Parkey. While so, there was a maintenance arrangement as per order in C.S.No.203 of 1934 of Monegar's Court between the children of Sara and Parkey. Sara and children stayed in puthilathu tarwad while Parkey and children stayed in palalam tarwad. The suit properties are friday (tarwad) properties of palalam tarwad. Sara and Parkey had self acquired properties as well. After the death of Sara, as per order in C.S.No.40 of 1957 of the Tahsildar, Amini, the self acquired properties of Sara were converted as friday properties of the tarwad and came to be held by puthilathu trarwad. It is the further case of petitioners/plaintiffs that consistent with the order in C.S.No.203 of 1934 the parties have executed document No.78 of 1980 which according to the petitioners, is only an arrangement between the parties for their maintenance and did not convey absolute right over properties to the parties concerned. However, asserting absolute right over the properties some of the respondents executed some documents. Hence the suit to set aside those documents, declare that the extecutants of those documents had no right of disposition as it was tarwad properties and for a decree for prohibitory injunction, alternatively, for recovery of possession.
(3.) AFTER commencement of trial, petitioners filed I.A.No.2903 of 2002 for amendment of the plaint. Purport of the application was to amend relief (b) in the plaint by incorporating the words "the decision in C.S.No.203 of 1934 and document No.78 of 1980 are for maintenance of the parties". A similar amendment was sought for in the body of the plaint as paragraph 9(a) to be newly inserted.