MANMOHAN SINGH
Kewal Kishan – Appellant
Versus
Delhi Development Authority – Respondent
Manmohan Singh, J.
1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 15th March, 2013 passed by the learned Civil Judge (West), Tis Hazari, Delhi, in Suit No.744/2006, whereby the petitioner/plaintiff’s application under Order VI, Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC was dismissed.
2. The main reason stated in the application for amendment of plaint was that in the month of February, 2012 when the petitioner was undertaking repairs in his ancestral house, he found that his father was also declared asami over the suit land. Therefore, it had become necessary for the petitioner to amend the plaint by filing of the application under Order VI, Rule 17 CPC for the purpose of proper adjudication of the suit.
3. Originally, the suit was filed by the petitioner/plaintiff for declaration and permanent injunction, on the ground that the respondent/defendant is trying to dispossess him from the suit property without any reason, as the petitioner has been in continuous and exclusive possession of the suit property. It was also stated in the plaint that no notice was served upon the petitioner which was mandatory therefor
Arundhati Mishra v. Shri Ram Charita Pandey (1994) 2 SCC 29
Ranganayakamma & Anr. v. K.S. Prakash (D) By Lrs. & Ors. [2008 (9) SCALE 144]
Steel Authority of India Ltd. v. Union of India (2006) 12 SCC 233
Vimal Chand Ghevarchand Jain v. Ramakant Eknath Jadoo (2009) 5 SCC 713 : MANU/SC/0441/2009
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.