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

2015 Supreme(All) 3974

DEVENDRA KUMAR ARORA
Shiv Poojan [U/A-227] – Appellant
Versus
District Magistrate Ambedkar Nagar Distt. Ambedkar Nagar – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:- Vijai Bahadur Verma

JUDGMENT

Dr. Devendra Kumar Arora,J.

Heard.

2. Petitioners have filed a suit against the private respondents which was registered as Suit No. 956 of 1990. In the said pending suit, petitioners moved an application 14.7.2015 for amendment in the plaint which was seriously contested by the defendants to the suit.

3. The Trial Court has rejected the application of the petitioners (112Ka1) for amendment which was assailed by the petitioners in Civil Revision No. 56 of 2015 before the District Judge.

4. The Revisional court while rejecting the revision vide judgment and order dated 10.9.2015 observed that the facts which the petitioners want to bring by way of amendment was in the knowledge of the petitioner since last 25 years but the petitioners waited for such a long years and now they have come up with the said application that too when the case is fixed for arguments.

5. In view of Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure no application for amendment shall be allowed after the trial has commenced unless the court comes to conclusion that in spite of due diligence the party could not have raised the matter before the commencement of the trial. In the instant case, the petitioner





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