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

2016 Supreme(All) 903

SUNITA AGARWAL
ABDUL AHMAD – Appellant
Versus
HAQ NAWAZ AHMAD – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Salil Kumar Rai for the Petitioner; Arpit Agarwal for the Respondent.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal, J.—By means of the present petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 23.1.2016 passed by the Additional District judge, Court No. 1, Pilibhit in Small Causes Case No. 03 of 2013 (Haq Nawaz Ahmad v. Abdul Ahmad). Brief facts giving rise to the present petition are :

2. The SCC case No. 03 of 2013 under Section 20(2) (a) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 has been filed for eviction of the defendants on the ground of default in payment of rent and demanding arrears of rent. Written statement was filed by the petitioner on 8.4.2013, the suit has proceeded for evidence. At the stage of evidence an application under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed on 3.11.2015 with a prayer to amend the written statement. The Court below has rejected the application on 23.1.2016 on the ground that the amendment has been sought in order to delay the proceedings and to avoid cross-examination of the plaintiff. It is further recorded by the Court below that by means of the amendment the petitioner seeks to withdraw the admission made by him in the written statement. Aggrieved by this order the present petition has been filed.

3. Learned c

























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