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

1985 Supreme(Bom) 71

V.A.MOHTA, M.S.DESHPANDE
Benisham Mohanlal Khetan – Appellant
Versus
Mahadeo Tukaram Borkar – Respondent


JUDGMENT - V.A. MOHTA, J.:---This reference has been made to resolve a conflict on a point-Can a Civil Court under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code allow the plaint to be so amended as to result in ousting its own jurisdiction in the matter. In (M/s. R. Jaikrishna Co. v. A-1 Co-operating Housing Society Limited)1, 1971 Mh.L.J. 472 a Single Bench of this Court took a view that amendment cannot be refused merely on the ground that its effect would be to deprive the Court of jurisdiction to try the suit. Another Single Bench in the case of (M/s. Nareshchandra and Co. v. M/s. New Shriram Motors)2, 1973 Mh.L.J. Note No. 54 C.R.A. No. 413/71 decided on 20th November, 1972 took a contrary view and held that the proper course would be to return the plaint along with an application for amendment to the plaintiff for presentation to the Proper Court.

2. A Judge, Small Causes Court, Nagpur permitted an amendment of the plaint which had the effect of Converting a simple suit on the basis of a relationship of landlord and a tenant into a suit based on title, which cannot be tried in Small Cause Jurisdiction. Having obtained permission from the Rent Controller a notice of ter








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