https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297981 A suit originally limited to injunction did not attract the notice requirement under Section 123 of the Kerala Panchayats Act, 1960. After statutory notice was served and the prescribed waiting period expired, the plaintiff could amend the plaint to add declaratory and consequential reliefs challenging the licence already issued. The provision's object was to give the Panchayat an opportunity to consider the claim and avoid needless litigation, and that purpose was satisfied by post-notice amendment. The contention that the amendment altered the suit's nature or that only a fresh suit was maintainable was rejected, so refusal of amendment was held erroneous. en-us Wed, 19 Feb 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Oct 2021 13:03:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297981 A suit originally limited to injunction did not attract the notice requirement under Section 123 of the Kerala Panchayats Act, 1960. After statutory notice was served and the prescribed waiting period expired, the plaintiff could amend the plaint to add declaratory and consequential reliefs challenging the licence already issued. The provision's object was to give the Panchayat an opportunity to consider the claim and avoid needless litigation, and that purpose was satisfied by post-notice amendment. The contention that the amendment altered the suit's nature or that only a fresh suit was maintainable was rejected, so refusal of amendment was held erroneous. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 19 Feb 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297981