Back
S. G. PANDIT
Raghunath Shetty – Appellant
Versus
Kusuma J. Shetty – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. The petitioners/defendants in O.S.No.1449/2018 on the file of the III Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Mangalore are before this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the order dtd. 25/3/2023 allowing I.A.No.8 filed by the respondents/plaintiffs under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC to amend the plaint to add certain facts as well as to add prayer of mandatory injunction.
2. Heard learned counsel Sri.B.S.Sachin for petitioners/defendants and learned counsel Sri.Abhishek Marla for respondents/plaintiffs. Perused the writ petition papers.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the suit of the respondents/plaintiffs was for permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from trespassing into plaint schedule property and thereby interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property. It is submitted that on framing of issues and before commencement of evidence of the plaintiffs, the plaintiffs filed I.A.No.8 under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC seeking permission to amend the plaint to include certain facts and also to include additional prayer of mandatory injunction to give vacant
The principle that amendments to pleadings should be allowed to ensure justice and to determine the real questions in controversy, provided they do not cause injustice or prejudice to the other party....
Amendments under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC should be permitted if they do not alter the nature of the suit and are necessary for fair adjudication.
Courts should be extremely liberal in granting the prayer for amendment of pleadings unless serious injustice or irreparable loss is caused to the other side. The amendment to pleading should be libe....
Amendments to pleadings are permissible when necessary to resolve the real dispute between parties, particularly when issues have not been framed, to avoid multiplicity of litigation.
Amendments to pleadings post-trial commencement are not permissible unless due diligence is shown, ensuring they do not alter the fundamental character of the case.
Amendments to pleadings are permitted for determining the real question in controversy and preventing injustice, even post-trial.
Amendments to pleadings under Order VI Rule 17 of C.P.C. can be allowed at any stage of proceedings to determine the real controversy.
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
