SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
Haro Mahto – Appellant
Versus
Rameshwar Mistry – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, J.
Prayer :
1. The instant petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 27.06.2023 passed in T.S. No.127/2016 by the Court of Sub-Judge-I, Giridih, whereby and whereunder, petition for amendment filed under Order 6 Rule 17 of the CPC in the plaint, has been rejected on the ground that amendment cannot be allowed at the stage of evidence, i.e., after commencement of trial, amendment in plaint is not formal in nature.
Facts
2. The brief facts of the case, as per the pleading made in the petition, required to be enumerated reads as under:-
3. It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners are the plaintiffs in T.S. No.127/2016 and has prayed for the following reliefs:-
b) That the plaintiffs be put in Khas possession of the suit lands by removing the pillars or structures standing thereon through the process of the Court.
c) That the costs of the suit and interest thereon pendent lite and till the realization of the same be awarded to the plaintiffs against the defendants.
4. Thereafter, the plaintiffs-petitioners
Om Prakash Gupta v. Ranbir B. Goyal
Rajkumar Gurawara vs. S.K. Sarwagi and Company Private Limited and Anr.
Revajeetu Builders and Developers vs. Narayanaswamy and sons and Ors.
Raj Kishore Jha Vrs. State of Bihar & Ors.
Shalini Shyam Shetty Vrs. Rajendra Shankar Patii
Mani Nariman Daruwala Vrs. Phiroz N. Bhatena
Laxmikant Revchand Bhojwani Vrs. Pratapsing Mohansingh Pardeshi
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.