Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
DEVASHIS BARUAH
Basanti Chauhan W/o Man Sadhu Chauhan – Appellant
Versus
Tapeswar Saharia S/o Late Danadi Ram Saharia – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. jurisdiction challenged for rejected applications. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments about the necessity of amendments. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. court's reasoning on procedural aspects. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. final directions and consequences. (Para 11) |
JUDGMENT :
DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.
1. Heard Mr. S. Sahu, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. S. M. Baruah, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.1, 2, 3 and 4. I have also heard Mr. T. R. Gogoi, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 and Mr. S. Bora, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 7 and 8. None appears on behalf of the respondent Nos. 9 and 10.
2. The supervisory jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked challenging the order dated 12.05.2022 passed in Title Suit No.09/2020 whereby the learned Court of the Munsiff at Udalguri had rejected two applications filed by the petitioner No.1 who was the defendant No.1 in the said suit.
3. The first application pertains to a petition filed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘the Code’) which is petition No.416/2022 wher
The court emphasized that procedural technicalities should be rectified in the interest of justice, allowing for amendments and reconsideration of preliminary issues without unnecessary delays.
Inadherence to procedural requirements does not preclude necessary amendments for justice, provided they are due to inadvertent errors by legal representation.
Amendments to pleadings after trial commencement require demonstration of due diligence; extensions must not be granted mechanically.
An amendment to a plaint may be allowed to insert a relief within the limitation period, despite procedural lapses, emphasizing that technicalities should not obstruct justice.
Procedural rules should not obstruct justice; amendments to plaints should be allowed to ensure real controversies are addressed, especially when no vested rights have accrued to the opposing party.
The proposed amendment to the plaint should be allowed if it is necessary for the just and proper disposal of the case and does not change the nature of the suit.
The court established that amendments to pleadings should be allowed liberally to correct errors and ensure proper adjudication, provided they do not prejudice the other party.
Amendments to pleadings are allowed only when they're necessary for deciding existing disputes, not for introducing entirely new cases.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
