Back
ARUN KUMAR JHA
Shipu Devi – Appellant
Versus
Piyush Kumar @ Piyush – Respondent
Arun Kumar Jha, J.—The record has been taken up on mentioning being made on behalf of the respondent.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and I intend to dispose of the petition at the stage of admission itself.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 01.02.2024 passed by learned Additional District Judge-2, Jamui in Probate Case No. 29 of 2022, whereby and whereunder the learned Additional District Judge has allowed the petition dated 18.12.2023 filed by the respondent under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short ‘the Code’) for addition of certain facts in paragraph 8 of the probate petition.
Learned counsel further submits that the impugned order is not sustainable in view of the fact that the said amendment has been allowed after commencement of trial as three witnesses have been examined in the matter. After coming to know about the status of the petitioner, the respondent/probate petitioner moved an application for amendment in order to fill up the gap in his case. Learned counsel has relied upon a decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vidyabai & Ors. vs. Padmalatha & Ors. passed in Civil
Amendment of Written Statement - Admissions made in the pleadings cannot be permitted to be withdrawn by amendment, but application may be made for explaining the clarification in the admissions.
The court may permit amendments to pleadings during proceedings if necessary for justice and the determination of real issues, provided due diligence to raise them before trial can be established.
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
