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

1968 Supreme(Mad) 368

VEERASWAMI
Chinnaswami Naicker – Appellant
Versus
Kandasami Gounder – Respondent


Advocates:
K. S. Desikan, for Petitioner; T. P. Gopalakrishnan, for Respondents.

Judgement

ORDER :- In my view the decision of the Court below is correct. The summary order was made on 16th June 1966. There is no dispute that the suit should be instituted within a year of that date, and that, it should be in a representative capacity. Vide Madina Bibi v. Ismail Durga Association, ILR (1940) Mad 808 : AIR 1940 Mad 789. The suit was filed on 5th September 1966 and the written statement on 21st November 1966. The defendants pointed out, in the written statement, the defect, to wit, the suit was not in a representative capacity. The issues were framed on 28th November 1966 and the suit came up for trial twice, but was adjourned every time. The petition for amending the plaint, to make the suit a representative one, was filed only on 21st July 1967. The Court below took the view that the application should be dismissed on the ground of limitation.

2. The view taken by the Court below is unsustainable. No doubt amendment of pleading should be freely allowed, at whatever stage it is asked for. But, this can only be subject to the pleas as to limitation or other prejudice to the other party. If the suit had been instituted on 21st July 1967, it would undoubtedly be barre




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