KALYAN RAI SURANA
Mustt. Manjula Begum – Appellant
Versus
Ramesh Kumar Virmani – Respondent
Heard Mr. Devashis Baruah, the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. Rup Jyoti Bordoloi, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
2. By filing this application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 28.03.2017 passed by the learned court of Munsiff No.1, Kamrup (M), Guwahati in T.S. No.225/2013, by which the petition No.856/2016 filed under Order VI Rule 17 CPC for amendment of the plaint was partly rejected.
3. Owing to the nature of prayer made herein, the pleadings of the parties is not required to be gone into. As per the statements made in the application for amendment of the plaint, on 08.04.2003, the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners had instituted a suit for ejectment of the respondent from the suit premises on the ground of defaulter and on the ground that the suit premises was bona fide required. The suit was numbered as T.S. No.102/2003 and was tried by the Court of the learned Civil Judge No.1, Kamrup, Guwahati. The respondent- defendant contested the suit by filing written statement. On 29.10.2004, the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner died and the present pe
Chakreshwari Construction (P) Ltd. Vs. Monohar Lal
Mahila Ram Kali Devi and others Vs. Nandaram (dead) through L.Rs. and others
Nidhi Vs. Ram Kripal Sharma (dead) through LRs
Rajesh Kumar Aggarwal and others Vs. K. K. Modi and others
Revajeetu Builders and Developers Vs. Narayanaswamy and sons and others
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.