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

2003 Supreme(AP) 566

V.V.S.RAO
Todendula Venkata Krishnaiah – Appellant
Versus
Uppu Gangaiah – Respondent


V. V. S. RAO, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner is the defendant in O. S. No. 301 of 1998 on the file of the court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kovur, Nellore District. The respondent filed the suit for declaration regarding suit irrigation channel and mandatory injunction. He filed an application being i. A. No. 1361 of 2002 under Order VI, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil procedure, 1908 ( cpc ) praying the trial Court to permit him to substitute 1997 in the place of 1987 in the cause of action paragraph.

( 2 ) IT is his case that in the paragraph narrating the cause of action, by mistake, instead of 1997 it was mentioned as 1987 and that it is a typographical mistake and, therefore, he may be permitted to amend the same as 1997 in the relevant paragraph. The petitioner opposed the application contending that when in written statement he has taken a plea to the effect that as the cause of action arose on 5-4-1987, the suit beyond three years is barred by limitation. A suggestion was also made to the respondent during the evidence that the suit channel was closed on 5-4-1997 and that at the time of arguments, the amendment cannot be allowed. He also contended that allowing the amendm
























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