Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
VIKAS BAHL
Baljeet Kaur – Appellant
Versus
Guddu Singh @ Satnam Singh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. rule application for typographical error corrections. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. parties' arguments on the amendment application. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court observations on merits and amendment necessity. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. final ruling allowing the amendment with cost. (Para 7) |
JUDGMENT :
Vikas Bahl, J. (Oral)
1. Present civil revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the impugned order dated 12.03.2025 (Annexure P-5) passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sunam, whereby an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC and under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC filed by the petitioner/plaintiff for the amendment of the plaint has been dismissed.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the plaintiff/petitioner is the sister of defendant No.l and has filed the suit for declaration to the effect that the plaintiff is owner in possession of the land to the extent of share which had been mentioned in the headnote of the plaint. It is further submitted that other reliefs are also prayed for. It is argued that there was a typographical mistake in the mentioning of khasra number in the plaint and thus, the amendment application was
The court grants permission for amendments to a plaint to correct typographical errors, emphasizing justice over technicalities, subject to cost conditions.
Court ruled that procedural amendment requests should be allowed even after the trial begins, provided they clarify existing claims and do not introduce new issues.
Amendments to pleadings under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC are not permitted after trial commencement unless due diligence is demonstrated, which was not shown in this case.
The trial court erred in denying amendment requests essential for proper case adjudication; the amendments were not mala fide and did not alter the core defense.
Amendment of plaint – If amendment is necessary for deciding real controversy between parties and for arriving at a just conclusion, such amendment could be allowed even at a late stage.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of principles for allowing or rejecting amendments under Order VI Rule 17 CPC, emphasizing the necessity, bona fide nature, and pre....
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
