Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Md. Hussain S/o Late Abdul Majid – Appellant
Versus
Md. Hemayun, S/o Late Abdul Majid – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
1. Petitioner is the plaintiff and is aggrieved by the order dated 19.01.2023 by which an amendment petition filed under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC has been rejected. The petitioner is also aggrieved by the order dated 03.05.2023 by which the prayer for withdrawing Partition Suit No. 80 of 2005 has also been turned down. The instant civil miscellaneous petition has been filed for quashing of both these orders.
2. Plaintiff filed the suit for partition of the suit property shown in Schedule ‘A’ as well as in the rental income shown in Schedule ‘B’ and for appointment of Survey Knowing Pleader Commissioner, to demarcate the share.
3. The petitioner filed the amendment petition dated 26.08.2021 proposing the following amendments:
“I (a) - in the relief portion, before relief 'A' new relied ‘AA’ may be added with the following expression "For that the right title and possession of plaintiff and defendant No.-1 be jointly declared over the suit land of schedule-A and defendant No.-2 to 7 be directed to vacate the suit premises and hand over the suit premises of plaintiff and defendant No.-1 within stipulated period, failing which they may be vacated fro
Amendments that fundamentally change a suit's nature are impermissible, and withdrawal permissions require valid grounds to prevent judicial abuse.
The court ruled that plaintiffs can withdraw a suit with permission to file a fresh suit if sufficient grounds for withdrawal exist, overriding trial court's error in denying such permission.
If a formal defect can be rectified by way of amendment, there is no necessity to seek withdrawal of suit.
Liberty to file a petition under Order I Rule 10 CPC seeking amendment of plaint. No irregularity or illegality, in impugned order warranting interference of this Court in exercise of jurisdiction un....
Amendments in civil suits for partition are to be allowed to ensure all issues are resolved, minimizing litigation unless they cause injustice or prejudice to the other party.
In partition suits, amendments to the plaint should be allowed unless they cause injustice or prejudice to other parties, promoting efficiency in resolving disputes.
The court ruled on the permissibility of withdrawing a suit under Order XXIII Rule 1 and clarified that a trial court may not partially grant or deny such requests but must decide them in full.
Withdrawal of a suit is permissible under sufficient grounds as per Order XXIII Rule 1(3) of the Code, not limited to formal defects.
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
