Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
B.P. ROUTRAY
SREI Multiple Asset Investment Trust, Kolkata, West Bengal – Appellant
Versus
Orissa Slurry Pipeline Infrastructure Ltd., Keonjhar, Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details of the court proceedings and parties involved. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding the change of name affecting the suit. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. description of plaintiff’s name change and its implications. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. applicability of companies act section on name changes. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. legal standards governing amendments in pleadings. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 6. reasoning against the merits of denying the amendment. (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 7. final dismissal of c.m.p. with no merit found. (Para 17) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. D. Nanda, learned Senior Advocate for the Petitioner and Mr. S.K. Dash & Mr. P.K. Rath, learned Senior Advocates for Opposite Party No.1.
3. Present Opposite Party No.1 being the Plaintiff filed the suit for permanent injunction against the Defendants restraining them to represent for the Plaintiff. Present Petitioner is Defendant No.1. As per the contention of the Defendants, it had huge amount outstanding against the Plaintiff. After filing of the suit, the interim order under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2, C.P.C. was passed by the learned trial court restraining the Defendants from such activities as stated in the order. Said interim order dated 29th N
The change of name of a litigant does not fundamentally alter the nature of a suit, allowing for amendments to be permitted under procedural justice principles.
The principle of res judicata prevents re-agitation of previously decided issues in subsequent applications, thus maintaining procedural integrity in litigation.
An amendment to a plaint is permissible if it does not change the nature of the suit or the cause of action and does not prejudice the defendants, as per Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC.
Amendments to pleadings under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC are permissible if they do not change the fundamental character of the suit and aim to avoid multiplicity of proceedings.
An individual cannot amend her plaint to represent a partnership firm if the firm is unregistered, as it violates Section 69(2) of the Indian Partnership Act.
Amendments to pleadings should be allowed when they are necessary for just adjudication and do not alter the fundamental nature of the suit, ensuring the resolution of real questions in controversy w....
Amendment in plaint – In terms of Order VI, Rule 17 of CPC, Court may at any stage of proceedings allow either of parties to alter or amend pleadings, in such manner or on such terms, as may be just.
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
