JAYANT NATH
VINOD TRIVEDI – Appellant
Versus
ATUL JAIN – Respondent
JAYANT NATH, J.
CM No. 38067/2016 (exemption)
Allowed subject to all just exceptions.
CM (M) No. 1039/2016 and CM No. 38066/2016 (stay)
1. By the present petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 27.07.2016 by which his application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC was dismissed.
2. The brief facts are that the petitioner claims that his father was a tenant in the suit premises since 1950. The plaintiff has filed the suit under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act. The need arose to file the present application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC as it is the contention of the petitioner that he has during the pendency of the suit come to know that defendant No. 1/respondent No. 1 has demolished the tenanted premises and hence, the need to amend his plaint as well as the prayer to add the relief of compensation.
3. The trial court noted that the petitioner in his cross-examination on 07.10.2010 has deposed that he knew that the entire building has been demolished and re-constructed and he came to know about this when the case was started. The trial court also noted that he is seeking amendment by way of the present applicatio
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.