Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
SANJEET PUROHIT
Karmchand, S/o Sh. Nathu Singh – Appellant
Versus
Darshan Singh, S/o Bhag Singh – Respondent
ORDER :
SANJEET PUROHIT, J.
1. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the validity and propriety of the order dated 28.08.2019 passed by learned Sr. Civil Judge, Sri Karanpur, District Sri Ganganagar (learned trial Court) rejecting the application filed by the petitioner–plaintiff under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC seeking amendment in the plaint.
2. The facts germane to the present writ petition are that:-
2.1 The petitioner-plaintiff has preferred a suit for specific performance of agreement to sell said to be executed by defendant No.1-Darshan Singh on 31.12.1986 agreeing to sell his share in the land in question. Learned trial court while proceeding ex-parte against the respondent defendant, vide judgment and decreed dated 21.07.2009 partly allowed the suit and passed money decree in favour of the petitioner-plaintiff, while denying relief of specific performance of the agreement dated 31.12.1986.
2.2. Said judgment dated 21.07.2009 and decree dated 01.08.2009 was challenged by the petitioner-plaintiff in regular first appeal.
On the other hand, defendant after coming to know about passing of ex-parte decree dated 01.08.2009, preferred an application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC wh
Court emphasized a liberal approach in allowing amendments under Order VI Rule 17, especially when necessary for complete adjudication and no significant prejudice to other party is caused.
Amendments to pleadings under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC should be allowed if necessary for justice and do not change the nature of the suit.
Amendments to pleadings under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC should be allowed if necessary for determining real issues, provided they do not cause injustice to the other party.
Court ruled that procedural amendment requests should be allowed even after the trial begins, provided they clarify existing claims and do not introduce new issues.
The court's decision emphasized that an amendment under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC should not change the nature or character of the suit or its cause of action.
Amendments to pleadings post-trial require showing of due diligence, and must not alter the fundamental nature of the case, or cause undue prejudice to the opposing party.
The court affirmed that amendments to pleadings should be liberally granted to serve justice, particularly when the cause of action arises from recent developments, like the dismissal of a related ci....
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
