SAVITHRI AMMAL Vs. M.A. GOPAL NAIDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent herein / plaintiff has filed a Civil Suit in O.S.No.424 of 1983, on the file of District Munsif Court, Ponneri against the revision petitioner herein / defendant to grant permanent injunction against the defendant, her men, agents and servants from interfering with the peaceful possession of the plaintiff and enjoyment of suit property.

(2.) THE revision petitioner herein / defendant had filed a written statement and resisted the said suit. After contest, the suit was dismissed. Against the dismissal of the said suit, the plaintiff has filed the above appeal in A.S.No.20 of 2003, on the file of Sub Court, Ponneri and challenged the trial Courts judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.424 of 1983, by the District Munsif, Ponneri. Under the circumstances, the plaintiff / respondent herein has filed an auxiliary application in I.A.No.114 of 2004 in A.S.No.20 of 2003, stating that he had purchased the suit schedule mentioned property in the Court auction on 30.03.1982 and also take delivery of the property through Court on 31.04.1983. Since the revision petitioner herein / defendant had attempted to interfere with the peaceful possession of the plaintiff, the plaintiff was constrained to file a suit for permanent injunction before the District Munsif Court, Ponneri. In the said suit in O.S.No.424 of 1983, the particulars regarding boundaries of scheduled mentioned properties has been typed incorrectly and inadvertently. The same had not been noticed by the plaintiff till the disposal of the suit. After seeing the judgment and decree passed in the said suit, the respondent came to know about the incorrect particulars of the scheduled mentioned properties. The defendant had also not pointed out the clerical error in typing the boundaries. Hence, the respondent herein has filed the auxiliary application in I.A.No.114 of 2004 to carry out the amendment.

(3.) ON considering the averments of both parties and on hearing the arguments of the learned counsel on either side, the Subordinate Judge was pleased to allow the said amendment application in I.A.No.114 of 2004 in A.S.No.20 of 2003, on condition that the respondent herein shall pay a sum of Rs.1,000/ - on or before 30.08.2005, since the delay had been caused for filing the said application.