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

2023 Supreme(Del) 3184

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
Surender Singh – Appellant
Versus
Vijay Kumar Aggarwal – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Mr. Rajesh Kumar and Mr. Gaurav Rathor, Advocates, for the Petitioner.
None, for the Respondent.

JUDGMENT

Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, J. (Oral):

1. This petition impugns the order dated 21.05.2018 passed by Civil Judge, Karkardooma Courts Complex, Delhi (`Trial Court') in Civil Suit No. 6359/2016, titled as Smt. Vijay Aggrawal v. Sh. Surinder Malik & Ors., whereby the application filed by the Petitioner under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (`CPC') was dismissed. The operative portion of the judgment reads as under:

    "12. Present facts in hand are analysed on threshold of the observations made above. In the instant matter, defendant no.2 virtually intended to substitute substantially the existing written statement with in the form of amended written statement. A perusal of the proposed amendment would show that each and every para of the preliminary objection of original written statement namely para no. 1 to 4 are sought to be substituted by new 10 paras and para no.3,5,7 and 10 of reply on merits are sought to be substituted by new paras. No attempt has been made by the defendant no.2 to point out what is sought to be omitted, altered, substituted or added in the proposed amendment. The lines, phrases and words which are being added o

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