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

1983 Supreme(Del) 225

J.D.JAIN
RUKHSANA SULTANA – Appellant
Versus
MOHINDER KAUR – Respondent


J. D. Jain

( 1 ) THE plaint in this suit was permitted to be amended in certain respects Vide order dt. 12. 4. 83 and an amended plaint was directed to be filed accordingly. The defendants were also called upon to file written statements to the amended plaint within a certain period, and they have done so. However, the plaintiff has moved this petition u/o. 6 R. 7 read with Section 151, Civil Procedure Code (the Code), complaining that in the garb of replying to the amended portion of the plaint the defendants have absolutely changed their original w/s without seeking permission of the Court for amendment. It is contended that the defendants could have amended their w/s only to the extent it was necessary for them to reply to the amended plaint as allowed by the Court and nothing further. Thus, the grievance of the plaintiff is that new grounds of claim and allegations of fact inconsistent with the previous pleadings of the defendants cannot be permitted unless, of course, they seek amendment of their previous w/ss under 0. 9 R. 17 of the Code.

( 2 ) THIS application is hotly contested by counsel for the defendants who has urged that on the plaint being amended a right accrued to th











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