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

2021 Supreme(HP) 935

RAVI MALIMATH
Ashok Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Abha – Respondent


JUDGMENT :

Ravi Malimath, J

Being aggrieved by the order passed by the trial Court in rejecting the defendant’s application under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC, the defendant is in appeal. The application seeking amendment of the written statement was filed when the matter was listed for defendant’s witnesses. The application was filed after the issues were framed and the matter was listed for defendant’s witnesses. On considering the plea, the trial Court rejected the application.

2. On considering the reasons assigned, I do not find any ground to interfere with the same. Once the trial has commenced, no amendment can be allowed provided due diligence has been shown. To this extent, I asked the learned counsel as to what is the due diligence. The due diligence, as stated by him, is only in para-9 of the application under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 of CPC for amendment of written statement, wherein it is stated as follows:-

    “9.That applicant/defendant could not brought above mentioned facts in written statement earlier filed as the documents required for preparation of written statement could not be collected inspite of due diligence……....”

3. Except this, there is no other avermen

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