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

2012 Supreme(AP) 435

C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
Kovvuri Ramakrishna Reddy – Appellant
Versus
Padala Satyanarayana Reddy – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:N. Siva Reddy, Advocate.
For the Respondents:P. Lakshma Reddy, Advocate.

Judgment :

This Civil Revision Petition is filed against order dated 29-12-2011 in I.A.No.1086/2011 in O.S.No.209/2006 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Ramachandrapuram.

The petitioner filed the above mentioned suit for a declaration that he is the absolute owner of the plaint schedule property and he is entitled for exclusive possession thereof. He has also sought for delivery of vacant possession of the schedule property and for costs. After completion of the trial, at the stage of arguments, the petitioner filed the above mentioned I.A. under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short "the Code") for amendment of the plaint for incorporating the relief of future profits. This application was opposed by the respondents/defendants mainly on the ground that the same is belated and also that the amendment, if allowed, requires retrial of the suit. The lower Court dismissed the said application. Feeling aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed the present Civil Revision Petition.

It needs to be observed that under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code, the Court is vested with the discretion to allow either party to alter or amend his pleadings for the purpos


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