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

2025 Supreme(Ori) 456

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
B.P. ROUTRAY
Saktikanta Samal – Appellant
Versus
Charan Samal – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. L.Mishra, Advocate

Table of Content
1. context of the amendment petition. (Para 3)
2. amendment for typographical corrections allowed. (Para 4 , 6)
3. general principles regarding amendment of pleadings. (Para 5 , 7 , 8)
4. conclusion: cmp allowed. (Para 9)

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. L.Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioner.

3. Present CMP is directed against order dated 20th March 2025 passed in C.S.No.39 of 2023 by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Chandikhole, wherein the prayer for amendment of the plaint sought by the Plaintiff has been rejected.

5. Before delving further into the merits of the challenge, it needs to be stated here about general principles regarding amendment of the plaint. In Life Insurance Corporation of India vs. Sanjeev Builders Pvt.Ltd & Anr., 2022 SCC Online SC 1128 Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as follows:-

71.1. Order 2 Rule 2 CPC operates as a bar against a subsequent suit if the requisite conditions for application thereof are satisfied and the field of amendment of pleadings falls far beyond its purview. The plea of amendment being barred under Order 2 Rule 2 CPC is, thus, misconceived and hence negatived.

71.3. The prayer for amendment is to be allowed:

71.3.2. To avoid

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