Back
C. T. RAVIKUMAR, SANJAY KAROL
Dinesh Goyal @ Pappu – Appellant
Versus
Suman Agarwal (Bindal) – Respondent
Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, the key points are as follows:
Courts should adopt a liberal approach in granting leave to amend pleadings, but such amendments cannot contravene statutory boundaries or legal limits on the power to amend (!) (!) .
The primary purpose of amendments is to determine the "real questions of controversy" between the parties and to facilitate effective and proper adjudication of the dispute (!) (!) (!) .
Amendments should generally be allowed unless they cause injustice or prejudice to the other side, such as causing delay, being malafide, or changing the fundamental nature of the suit (!) (!) (!) (!) .
Specific factors to consider include whether the amendment seeks to rectify material deficiencies, introduces new evidence or approach, or questions the validity of critical documents like a Will (!) (!) .
The timing of the amendment is significant; amendments sought after the commencement of trial require demonstration that due diligence was exercised and that the amendment is necessary for just adjudication (!) (!) .
In cases involving the validity of a Will, it is essential to determine its genuineness before proceeding with related issues like succession or partition of property (!) (!) .
Delay in seeking amendments should not be used to deny justice, especially if the amendment is crucial for resolving the core dispute, such as the genuineness of a Will (!) (!) .
The overarching principle is to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and multiple avenues of litigation by allowing amendments that aid in a comprehensive and final resolution of the dispute (!) (!) .
The appellate authority emphasized that even if amendments are sought late, they should be considered favorably if they serve the interests of justice and do not cause undue prejudice (!) .
The order allowing the amendment was upheld, and the trial court was instructed to decide all issues, including the genuineness of the Will, expeditiously. The discussion was limited to procedural aspects concerning the amendment, with no opinion expressed on the case's merits (!) .
These points encapsulate the principles and considerations relevant to amendments of pleadings, especially in cases involving disputes over wills and property, emphasizing a balanced, justice-oriented approach within statutory limits.
JUDGMENT :
Sanjay Karol, J.
Leave granted.
2. Impugned in this appeal is a judgment and order of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Gwalior Bench, passed in M.P. No.1695 of 2018 dated 21st August, 2019. The application filed under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908,1[‘CPC’ for short], by respondent No.1,2[Hereinafter referred to as ‘the plaintiff’] was allowed setting aside order dated 14th March, 2018 passed by the 8th Civil Judge, Class-2, Gwalior, District Gwalior in Civil Suit No.241-A/2016, whereby such application stood rejected.
3. The limited question that arises for our consideration is whether the High Court committed an error in allowing the amendment to the plaint filed by the present respondents.
4. The facts, shorn of unnecessary detail, as necessary for disposal of the present appeal are:-
4.1 The appellant,3[Hereinafter referred to as ‘the defendant’] and respondents, are siblings being children of Smt. Katoribai. The dispute relates to House No.27/1695, renumbered as 1695/1804 situated at Gangamai Santar, Murar, District Gwalior, M.P.,4[Hereinafter referred to as ‘the suit property’], which was purchased by way of registered sale deed dated 1st January,
(1) Amendment of plaint – Courts should adopt a liberal approach in granting leave to amend pleadings, however, same cannot be in contravention of statutory boundaries placed on such power.(2) Will –....
The court affirmed that amendments to pleadings should be allowed liberally to ensure effective adjudication of the real questions in controversy, provided they do not cause injustice to the other si....
Amendments to pleadings under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC should be allowed if necessary for determining real issues, provided they do not cause injustice to the other party.
Amendments to pleadings under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC should be allowed if necessary for justice and do not change the nature of the suit.
Rule of amendment is essentially a rule of justice, equity and would conscious and the power of amendment should be exercised in the larger interest of doing full and complete justice to the parties ....
Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, which reads as amendment of pleadings.
Amendments to pleadings in partition suits should be liberally allowed to ensure justice and avoid multiplicity of proceedings, without assessing the merits of the amendment at the initial stage.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
