Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.SATHISH KUMAR, J
Sumithra Bhai – Appellant
Versus
K. Venkopa Rao – Respondent
ORDER :
(N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.)
Challenging the order of the appellate court rejecting the application filed under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC for amendment seeking relief of declaration, the present revision has been filed.
2. The suit has been filed originally by the revision petitioner for eviction claiming that the defendant/respondent is the tenant in the shop premises. Written statement was filed by the tenant on 10.04.2015 denying the title. Thereafter, it appears that the suit was dismissed on 14.10.2020. While dismissing the suit, the Trial Court has observed that the plaintiff is claiming title on the basis of the gift deed said to have been executed by one Vittal Rao had ommitted to seek relief of declaration. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed application under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC for amendment before the appellate court only for adding the relief of declaration. It was opposed by the respondent on the ground that as far as the title of the petitioner is concerned, the same was disputed in the year 2015 itself and the declaration ought to have been sought within a period of three years, whereas, the application has been filed only in the year 2022, that too, pending appeal.
An amendment sought for a declaration in a possession suit does not change its character; limitation for possession applies over declaration, allowing amendments at the appellate stage serves justice....
The court established that the limitation for suits claiming declaration and possession of immovable property is 12 years under Article 65 of the Limitation Act, countering the trial court's applicat....
The court upheld that an amendment to include a declaration of title in a suit is barred by the limitation period defined in Article 58 of the Limitation Act if filed significantly after the right to....
The suit for possession based on title is governed by Article 65 of the Limitation Act, allowing 12 years from the date of adverse possession, not Article 58.
At the stage of considering an amendment of the plaint, the court is not required to inquire into the genuineness of the pleadings but to determine if the amendment would help in determining the real....
Limitation period for suits involving cancellation of sale deeds and declarations is a factual issue that requires proper examination, and prior suits do not preclude new claims if possession remains....
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
