RAJASEKHARAN NAIR Vs. RAJALEKSHMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein is the defendant in Ext.P4 suit, O.S. No.622/2011, pending before the Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram. He is aggrieved by Ext.P9 order, which allowed an amendment to incorporate a relief for re-conveyance of the schedule property by specific performance of an agreement, on the ground that the relief stood barred by the law of limitation as on the date on which the amendment was sought for by Ext.P6 application. According to the petitioner/defendant, Ext.P9 is a cryptic order, with illogical reasoning and contrary to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, as regards permissibility of an amendment to incorporate a time barred relief.

(2.) Heard Sri.Ayyappan Sankar, learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant and Sri.G.S.Reghunath, learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff.

(3.) The nature and character of Ext.P1 sale deed executed by the plaintiff in favour of the defendant is the issue involved in the suit. The subject suit was filed for a declaration that Ext.P1 sale deed dtd. 22/4/2009 is, in effect, a mortgage deed only. The plaintiff also sought for a prayer allowing her to pay off the mortgage amount of Rs.13,00,000.00 and to redeem and recover possession of the plaint schedule property. A permanent prohibitory injunction was also sought for, as the second prayer.