H SELAI GOWDER Vs. KANNAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Revision Petition has been filed against the order dated 26.8.2003, made in I.A.No.199/2003 in O.S.No.194/1996, on the file of the District Munsif Court, Kottagiri, The Nilgiris now renumbered as O.S.No.14/2004 on the file of the Sub-Judge, Udhagamandalam, The Nilgiris.

(2.) THE defendants in O.S.No.194/1996 are the revision petitioners before this court. Originally, a suit was filed by the respondents herein in O.S.No.194/1996 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Kottagiri for declaration declaring the title of the plaintiffs in respect of the suit properties and also for delivery of possession. In the suit in I.A.No.211/1998 an advocate-commissioner was appointed and he filed a report on 12.3.2003 after inspecting the suit schedule property to find out the number of trees cut down, when it was cut and the value of the trees that were cut down.

(3.) I find force in the submissions of the learned counsel that no reasons at all given in the affidavit by the respondents herein for substituting para 10. What is stated in the affidavit is that the advocate-commissioner valued the tree cut by defendants 1 and 2 at Rs.12,58,862/- and therefore it becomes necessary for them to amend the plaint by seeking the relief of damages. On that basis only the amendment petition has been filed and there is not even a whisper in the affidavit as to why they wanted to substitute para 10. The trial court has failed to advert to this fact and has wrongly allowed the amendment petition for substituting para 10. Therefore, the trial court's order insofar as permitting the respondents herein to substitute para 10 is liable to be set aside and accordingly set aside.