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

1997 Supreme(Raj) 313

SHIV KUMAR SHARMA
Chandgi Ram – Appellant
Versus
Babulal – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
R.K. Agrawal, for Petitioner Nemo, for Non-Petitioner

Honble SHARMA, J.–The only question which arises for consideration in this revision is :

Whether amendment made in the plaint under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, during the pendency of the suit will relate back to the date of filing of suit or the proceedings on the new ground shall began from the date of fil-ing of amendment plaint ?

(2). This question emerges in the circumstances set out below.

(i) The plaintiff petitioner (for short the plaintiff) instituted a suit for

eviction in respect of shop on March 18, 1986 against the defendant non-petitioner (for short the defendant) on the grounds of default in making payment of rent, material alteration and nuisance relying on a rent note executed on December 20, 1983. Suit premises indisputably was taken for commercial purposes. During the pendency of the suit an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC was filed by the plaintiff seeking amendment of the plaint for incorporating ground of reasonable and bonafide requirement of suit premises. The application was allowed by the trial court on July 11, 1995. The defendant preferred revision but it was dismissed by this court on Feb. 9, 1996.

(ii) The plaintiff filed amended pl















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