Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN
Shrikrishna Ramchandra Dharap – Appellant
Versus
Swaroop Surendranath Chopra Decd. through LRs. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.
Context and Background:
1. This is a Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning an order dated April 3, 2025 passed by the District Judge-3, Panvel (“Impugned Order”), rejecting an application filed by the Petitioners under Order VI, Rule 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”). This Petition has come up before me due to recusal by the Regular Bench. With the consent of the parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final hearing and disposal.
2. The application that stands rejected in the Impugned Order was taken out in appellate proceedings (“Appeal”), in which the Petitioners had made a prayer for striking out pleadings in the original plaint of the Special Civil Suit No. 28 of 1985 (“Suit 28”), on the ground of abuse of the process of the Court by Respondent No. 1 in the course of Suit 28.
3. The basis for this prayer was the allegation that when the plaint in Suit 28 was filed, there purportedly had been no prayer seeking possession of the suit property, despite the plaint containing a prayer for specific performance.
Contentions of the Parties:
4. According to Mr. Vineet Naik, Learned Senior Counsel on behalf of the
The court affirmed that raising claims of abuse of process decades after a judgment lacks merit, especially in the absence of timely objection or evidence of manipulation.
Trial commences only upon the court’s first engagement with evidence, not by issue framing, permitting necessary amendments for fair resolution.
Late amendments in legal pleadings require compelling justification; absence of due diligence leads to denial.
Amendment in plaint can be allowed at any stage of suit even before pronouncement of Judgment – Question of requirement of filing written statement cannot be assessed by court at this stage.
High Court's jurisdiction under Article 227 is to ensure subordinate courts act within their authority; amendments to pleadings must be sought in good faith and with due diligence.
This Court also concurs with the submissions made by learned counsel for the respondents that in exercise of its powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
The concept of 'Due Process' and its application in property disputes, as well as the limitations of the court's powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
Established limits for amending pleadings after trial onset under CPC provisions.
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
