SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(SC) 170

C. T. RAVIKUMAR, RAJESH BINDAL
Basavaraj – Appellant
Versus
Indira – Respondent


JUDGMENT :

Rajesh Bindal, J.

1. Vide impugned order,1[Order dated 18.08.2010 passed in W.P. No. 82086 of 2010] passed by the High Court,2[High Court of Karnataka, Circuit Bench at Gulbarga], an application filed by respondents No. 1 and 2/plaintiffs for amendment of the plaint was allowed subject to costs of Rs.2,000/-.

2. Briefly, the facts available on record are that respondents No. 1 and 2 filed a suit,3[Original Suit No. 151 of 2005] for partition of the ancestral property belonging to their grand father pleading that no actual partition of the property has ever taken place. When the suit was at the fag end, an application was filed by respondents No. 1 and 2 seeking amendment of the plaint. The amendment sought was to add prayer in the suit for a declaration that an earlier compromise decree dated 14.10.2004 was null and void. As prayer was not made earlier, the court fee required thereon was also sought to be affixed. The ground on which the amendment was sought was that due to oversight and mistake, the respondents No. 1 and 2/plaintiffs were unable to seek the relief of declaration. No prejudice as such would be caused to the defendants as limited relief is for fair partition

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top