NISHAD Vs. NAJMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An order in I.A. 360/2017 in O.P.1617/2017 passed by the Family Court, Thrissur on 2.8.2017, allowing amendment of pleadings in the Original Petition sought by the original petitioner, (wife) is challenged by the respondents in this Original Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) The wife filed O.P.1617/2016 seeking recovery of gold ornaments and amounts alleged to have been entrusted with the respondents on various occasions. The respondents in the O.P., filed detailed counter denying the allegations of entrustment and liability for return. The petitioner (wife) was examined as PW1 in the lower court and before her cross examination could be completed, she found that there were some omissions and corrections to be made in the pleadings which occurred due to the clerical mistakes. Therefore she filed I.A.307/2017 for amendment which was seriously opposed by the petitioners herein. The court below did not accept the objections and accordingly the I.A was allowed on the condition of payment of cost of Rs.1000/-.

(3.) When the Original Petition was taken up for hearing, the counsel for the respondent herein submitted that the cost paid by her was already accepted by the petitioners and therefore this O.P. is not maintainable. We are also of the view that, after receipt of the cost and having submitted to the impugned order, the respondents in the I.A are not entitled to challenge the order in this Original Petition. That apart, we find there are no reasons on merit also to interfere with the impugned order passed by the lower court.