AANI MUTHU Vs. SELVAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Against the dismissal of the amendment petition, this revision petition is filed by the petitioner/plaintiff.

(2.) The facts of the case are that petitioner/plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with his possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. Pending suit, the petitioner took out an amendment application to make amendments in the four boundaries of the suit property. The Court below dismissed the amendment petition, against which, this revision is filed.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the Court below without considering that proposed amendment does not change the character of the suit, erroneously dismissed the amendment petition and the Court below ought to have considered that the wrong mentioning of four boundaries was only due to inadvertence and therefore, proposed amendment should be allowed. According to the petitioner, even the proposed amendment regarding measurement of the suit property was admitted in the written statement. Thus, the learned counsel prays for allowing this revision petition. In support of his contention, learned counsel relied on the following decisions:-