All that the petitioner/plaintiff wanted was to correct the mis-description of the plaint schedule property to be in tune with the report of the Advocate Commissioner. The application for amendment of the plaint filed for that purpose ought to have been allowed by the court below. The contention of the plaintiff that she did not realise the mis-description earlier in spite of due diligence deserves acceptance. The defendant is not in any way prejudiced since the nature of the suit is not altered and the plaint schedule property is not changed. 2. Ext.P4 order is quashed and I.A.No.26/2014 in O.S.No.200/2012 on the file of the court of the Munsiff of Kattappana is allowed. The court below is directed to dispose of the suit within a period of three months from the date of production of this judgment.
The Original Petition is allowed. No costs.
Sd/- V.CHITAMBARESH, Judge.
nj.