Back
NIDHI GUPTA
Sukhbir Singh – Appellant
Versus
Gaje Singh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. filing of revision petition against trial court order. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. argument for additional issues based on limitation. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. plaintiffs' assertion of proper pleadings. (Para 8 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. knowledge of the gift deed and its relevance to limitation. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 19) |
| 5. mixed questions of law and fact regarding limitation. (Para 18 , 22 , 23 , 26 , 30) |
| 6. judgment on raising limitation in pleadings. (Para 24 , 25 , 29) |
| 7. final conclusion dismissing the revision petition. (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34) |
JUDGMENT
Ms. Nidhi Gupta, J.
Present Revision Petition has been filed by defendant No.3 against order dated 09.11.2022 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Rohtak in Civil Suit No.35 of 07.01.2016 titled as "Gaje Singh (since deceased) and Another v. Smt. Brahmo Devi (since deceased) and Others (Annexure P1), whereby application moved by the petitioner under Order 14, Rule 5 read with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as "CPC"), for framing of additional issues, has been dismissed.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiffs/respondents No.1 and 2 herein, filed Civil Suit No.35 o
Gift deed - Rejected the plaint - Limitation - Suit is barred by limitation in view of pleadings of appellant that he came to know about gift deeds only two days prior to filing of suit as such issue....
The court emphasized strict adherence to limitation periods for amendments in civil suits and the necessity of including all consequential amendments as per procedural rules.
(1) Rejection of plaint – When a document referred to in plaint, forms basis of plaint, it should be treated as a part of plaint – Court cannot look into written statement or documents filed by defen....
The absence of essential elements for a valid gift deed under Mohammedan law led to the dismissal of the suit due to limitations.
Amendments to pleadings are permissible under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC if they do not change the nature of the suit and are necessary for justice, even if filed after a delay.
The court ruled that limitation issues require evidence and cannot be decided solely on the plaint's initial averments, emphasizing the need for a holistic reading of the plaint.
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
