Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATYEN VAIDYA
Balbir – Appellant
Versus
Rajinder Kumar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Satyen Vaidya, J.)
By way of instant petition, petitioner has assailed order dated 10.2.2023 (Annexure P-6), passed by learned Civil Judge, Court No. IV, Una, District Una, H.P., in CIS No. 287/2023, whereby, the application for amendment of the written statement of the petitioner has been dismissed.
2. Respondent herein has filed a suit for permanent prohibitory and mandatory injunctions against the petitioner with respect to a passage through land comprised in Khasra No.6 in Mohal Haroli Pratham, Tehsil Haroli, District Una. The respondent has claimed joint ownership in land comprised in Khasra No.6 with petitioner/defendant and others and on such premise has claimed right of passage from the said land to his house.
3. Petitioner/defendant in his written statement has unequivocally admitted respondent to be the joint owner of the suit land. He, however, has claimed separate possession on the basis of mutual understanding between the parties. The right of passage of the respondent through the land comprised in khasra No.6 has also been denied.
4. After framing of issues, petitioner preferred an application for amendment of the written statement inter- alia seeking to withdr
The right to withdraw an admission in a written statement is not absolute; sufficient justification and due diligence must be demonstrated to amend post-trial commencement.
Amendments to pleadings may be allowed if they are essential for effective adjudication of the controversy between the parties and do not change the nature of the suit.
The court affirmed that amendments to pleadings post-trial commencement are not permitted unless due diligence is shown, emphasizing the restrictive nature of supervisory jurisdiction under Article 2....
The court grants permission for amendments to a plaint to correct typographical errors, emphasizing justice over technicalities, subject to cost conditions.
Point of Law : Principles applicable to amendments of plaint are equally applicable to amendments of written statements.
Amendments to pleadings are permissible at any stage if necessary for effective adjudication, and delay alone does not warrant rejection unless it causes serious prejudice.
The court upheld a liberal approach to amendments in pleadings, allowing inconsistencies unless they cause prejudice, emphasizing the need for effective adjudication of the real issues.
The court's decision emphasized the importance of considering the impact of amendments on the nature and character of the suit, and the need to compensate for lack of due diligence in pursuing litiga....
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
