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

1986 Supreme(Ori) 121

K.P.MOHAPATRA
PRAFULLA KUMAR SAHOO – Appellant
Versus
CHARULATA SAHOO – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.C.Swain, B.H.MOHANTY, B.L.N.SWAMY, K.C.Patnaik, P.KAR

K. P. MOHAPATRA, J.


( 1 ) IN this revision the impugned order passed by the learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Cuttack allowing amendment of the plaint has been challenged.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff (opposite party 1) instituted Title Suit No. 348 of 1980 for partition of the suit property claiming one-third share therein. During trial of the suit her evidence and the evidence of defendant 2 (opposite party 2) had been closed and defendant 1 (petitioner) had already examined seven witnesses. At that point of time the plaintiff filed a petition under O. 6, R. 17 of the Civil P. C. (Code for short) for amendment of the plaint for inclusion of two more reliefs (i) claiming rendition of accounts and (ii) recovery of mesne profits in addition to the original prayer for partition. The petitioner opposed the amendment on the ground that the proposed reliefs claiming rendition of accounts and recovery of mesne profits were barred by limitation. After hearing both parties, however, the learned Court below allowed the amendments limiting the claim for mesne profits for a period of three years prior to the institution of the suit.

( 3 ) THE only point that falls for consideration is whether th




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