Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
J.J. Munir, J.
Smt. Subhawati and Others – Petitioners
Versus
Smt. Lalita and Another – Respondents
Matters Under Article 227 No. 816 of 2019
Decided On : 25-11-2022
Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 227 – Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – Order VI Rule 17 – Cause of action and relief – Granting an amendment – This is a defendants’ petition under Article 227 of Constitution challenging order, granting an amendment to plaint by Appellate Court – Held, There is also another reason, which ought to have weighed with the Appellate Court in the opinion of this Court. It is true that normally amendments are to be granted, if sought promptly or even with some delay – An amendment, that is mala fide or not made in good faith, should never be granted – Here, Amendment, in opinion of this Court, squarely falls into that category – There is not slightest of reason for plaintiffs to have waited until stage of appeal to seek this amendment and introduce a case, of which they had knowledge all along – Said fact by itself betrays lack of bona fides on plaintiffs' part – So far as impugned order goes, it has already been remarked that it is an entirely cryptic disposition of amendment application and the Appellate Court hardly seems to have bestowed any consideration to plea before it, which has been casually allowed – In circumstances, impugned order in considered opinion of Court, cannot be sustained – Petition allowed.
JUDGMENT :
This is a defendants’ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution challenging the order, granting an amendment to the plaint by the Appellate Court.
2. Sadavriksha, a native of Village Digra Somali, Pargana and Tehsil Salempur, District Deoria, was twice married. He married Smt. Tetri, of whom two sons were born, Triloki and Kapildev. Smt. Tetri passed away in Sadavriksha's life time. After her demise, Sadavriksha married Smt. Lalita. Lakkhu, another son of Sadavriksha, was born of the wedlock of Sadavriksha and Smt. Lalita. Smt. Subhawati is Triloki's wife whereas Smt. Dhanmati is Kapildev's. It is between Smt. Lalita and Lakkhu on one hand and Smt. Subhawati, Smt. Dhanmati, Sadavriksha, Triloki and Kapildev on the other, that litigation erupted in the year 2005, when Sadavriksha, now deceased, executed a sale deed of his land in favour of Smt. Subhawati and Smt. Dhanmati.
3. Smt. Lalita and Lakkhu, who shall hereinafter be referred to as 'the plaintiffs' (unless the context requires individual reference), commenced action by instituting O.S. No. 333 of 2005 in the Court of the Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Deoria, seeking cancellation of the sale deed and permanent prohibitory injunction. Smt. Subhawati, Smt. Dhanmati, the two vendees were arrayed as the defendants first set to the suit, Sadavriksha, the vendor was arrayed as the defendant second set and Triloki and Kapildev, husbands of the two vendees and sons of Sadavriksha, were arrayed as the defendants third set.
4. Now, Sadavriksha is no more, which leaves for the defendants, Smt. Subhawati, Smt. Dhanmati, Triloki and Kapildev. All of them together, shall hereinafter be called as 'the defendants, unless the context requires individual reference.
5. The plaintiffs' case briefly put is that they represent Sadavriksha's family after his second marriage to Smt. Lalita, who was married to Sadavriksha some 30 years antedating the commencement of action. Lakkhu was born to parties and 18 years old at the time of institution of the suit. For some time past, relations between the plaintiffs and Sadavriksha had come under strain in consequence whereof Smt. Lalita had brought proceedings against Sadavriksha for the grant of maintenance. A maintenance order had been passed against Sadavriksha. In compliance, Smt. Lalita was in receipt of maintenance.
6. Of late, the daughters-in-law of Sadavriksha had become the recipients of his favour and for the said reason, his sons Triloki and Kapildev together with their wives had colluded and ganged up to motivate and defraud Sadavriksha into executing a sale deed of his entire landed property in their favour. They succeeded in defrauding Sadavriksha into executing a registered sale deed dated 14.04.2005 in favour of Smt. Subhawati and Smt. Dhanmati. Upon coming to know of the execution of the sale deed aforesaid, the plaintiffs instituted the suit for cancellation and permanent injunction on the following grounds:
(b) The suit property is the acquisition of Jokhu, Sadavriksha's ancestor, on account of which the plaintiffs have a one-third share therein.
(c) The execution of the impugned sale deed by Sadavriksha has been secured through fraud, deceit and misrepresentation.
(d) Sadavriksha had no right to alienate the property that was ancestral and the sale deed is ultra vires.
(e) Succession to the property in dispute is governed by the Hindu Succession Act and the plaintiffs, therefore, have a right as co-sharers therein.
(f) Sadavriksha had no legal necessity to execute the sale deed.
(g) The impugned sale deed is not properly executed and verified.
(h) The plaintiffs are in possession of the suit property in accordance with the family settlement.
(i) The impugned sale deed is not Sadavriksha's mental act.
7. It is on these grounds that a decree for cancellation of the registered sale deed dated 14.02.2005 was soug
Amendments to pleadings under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC should be allowed if necessary for determining real issues, provided they do not cause injustice to the other party.
Amendments to pleadings under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC should be allowed if necessary for justice and do not change the nature of the suit.
Amendments altering the fundamental nature of a case are impermissible; evidence must align with pleadings for consideration in civil litigation.
Amendments to pleadings are essential for effective adjudication and should be allowed unless they change the nature of the suit or cause irreparable prejudice to the other party.
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
