MANSOOR AHMAD MIR
Ali Mohd. Magloo – Appellant
Versus
Ab. Hamid Magloo – Respondent
2. Heard.
Plaintiffs have sought twin reliefs in the application; one for arraying Ghulam Nabi as a party in the array of defendants; and second to amend para-12 of the plaint.
3. The prayer for arraying Ghulam Nabi Magloo as a party defendant came to be rejected earlier and that order had attained finality and despite of that plaintiffs have sought again this prayer. It appears that during the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the appellant was constrained to give up the prayer of arraying Ghulam Nabi Magloo as defendant when he was asked by trial court that prayer stands already rejected. Accordingly, application to that extent was not pressed by learned counsel for the plaintiffs.
4. The application for amending para-12 of the plaint came to be rejected rightly and legally for the following reasons:
5. In para-12 of the plaint, the plaintiff has pleaded how he got knowledge of
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.