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

1995 Supreme(Del) 274

D.K.JAIN, M.JAGANNADHA RAO
EVELYN J. DISNEY – Appellant
Versus
RAJESHWAR NATH GUPTA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Amitabh Narayan, ANIL KHER, ARUN MOHAN, S.N.MARVAH, SAMIR PAREKH

D. K. Jain, J.

( 1 ) THIS is defendant No. 7 s appeal under Section 10 of the Delhi High Court Act, 1966, against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 6 May 1994, dismissing her application under Order 6 Rule 17 Civil Procedure Code for amendment of written statement filed on her behalf on 15 November 1988 in Suit No. 662/1988.

( 2 ) THE learned Single Judge, in the impugned order, in brief, narrated the progress in the suit proceedings from the beginning till the filing of the application for amendment and observed that it was manifest therefrom that the application was moved after five years of the institution of the suit and after the conclusion of arguments by counsel for the contesting parties and after filing of written arguments by the plaintiff and defendant No. 7. The Court thus, felt that the application for amendment was highly belated and had been moved with a view to delaying the disposal of the case. The application for amendment was thus dismissed in limine. The dismissal of the application has been assailed in the grounds of appeal on the ground that there was no limitation provided for filing application for amendment of the pleadings; the scope of Order 6 R


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