C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
G. S. Prakash – Appellant
Versus
Polasa Hanumanlu – Respondent
This Civil Revision Petition arises out of order, dated 05/03/2013, in I.A.No.2843 of 2007 in O.S.No.93 of 2007 on the file of the learned III Additional District Judge. (FTC), Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar, Hyderabad.
The petitioner filed the above mentioned suit for specific performance of agreement of sale. He has pleaded that on 10/08/2006, the respondent has executed an agreement of sale in his favour in respect of the suit schedule property. The petitioner filed I.A.No.2843 of 2007 under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short “the CPC”) for amendment of the plaint by adding paragraphs 2(a) & 2(b) to the plaint. The Court below rejected the said application. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed this Civil Revision Petition.
Before dealing with the merits of the case, it is appropriate to mention that a large chunk of cases filed in this Court arises out of disputes pertaining to amendment of pleadings. A perusal of several orders of the lower Courts convinces me to conclude that in majority cases, they have been failing to comprehend the true purport of the provisions of Order VI Rule 17 CPC with reference to the set
Ma Shwe Mya Vs. Maung Mo Hnaung AIR 1922 P.C. 249
Pirgonda Hongonda Patil Vs. Kalgonda Shidgonda Patil and others AIR 1957 S.C. 363
Sampath Kumar Vs. Ayyakannu and another (2002) 7 SCC 559 = AIR 2002 SC 3269
Rajesh Kumar Agarwal Vs. K.K.Modi (2006) 4 SCC 385
M/s. Modi Spinning & Weaving Mills Co. Ltd
L.J. Leach and Co. Vs. Jardine Skinner & Co. AIR 1957 SC 357
South Konkan Distilleries v. Prabhakar Gajanan Naik (2008) 14 SCC 632
Usha Devi Vs. Rijwan Ahmad and others (2008) 3 SCC 717
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.