Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra
Devta Bhagwan Shri Krishna Lala Virajman Also Known As Shri Keshav Dev Ji Maharaj – Appellant
Versus
Trust Of Alleged Shahi Masjid Idgah – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, J.
1. Heard Sri Hari Shankar Jain, learned counsel for the plaintiff, Ms. Tasneem Ahmadi appearing through virtual mode and Sri Nasirruzaman, Afzal Ahmad, learned counsel for the defendants on amendment application A-31 filed under Order VI Rule 17 CPC before this Court.
2. In this amendment application, prayer has been made to add certain facts based on notification dated 17.12.1920 issued by Lieutenant Governor, State of United Province and prayer has been made for allowing the plaintiff to implead Union of India through Secretary Ministry of Home Affairs as defendant no. 5 and ASI as defendant no. 6 in the suits as both amendment application bear identical facts and prayer.
3. The plaintiffs prayed for leave to implead Union of India through Secretary Home Affairs and ASI as defendant as well as leave to add 04 new paragraphs in the plaint after paragraph 95 marked as 95A, 95B, 95C, 95D in the plaint in the light of notification no. 1669/1133- M issued sub section (3) of section 3 of Ancient Monuments Preservation Act (VII of 1904) published in official Gazette on 27.12.1920 wherein portion of Katra mound which are not in the position of nazul
Amendments to include new parties in a pending suit are permissible if they clarify existing claims without introducing new causes of action, ensuring effective adjudication.
Amendments to pleadings in civil suits should be allowed if they facilitate proper adjudication and do not introduce a new cause of action.
The court ruled that the plaints disclose a valid cause of action, are not barred by limitation, and the religious character of the property requires evidence to be determined at trial.
Amendments under Civil Procedure Code should be allowed to resolve real questions in controversy, provided they do not change the nature of the suit or cause undue hardship to the other party.
Amendments to pleadings should be allowed to determine the real controversy between parties, emphasizing a liberal approach to avoid multiplicity of litigation.
The Places of Worship Act, 1991 does not bar the determination of the religious character of a place of worship, which must be established through evidence in court.
Amendments to pleadings under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC are permissible if they do not change the fundamental character of the suit and aim to avoid multiplicity of proceedings.
Amendments to pleadings under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC should not change the nature of the suit or introduce new causes of action, and must be necessary for the proper adjudication of the case wit....
Amendments to pleadings that change the nature of a suit are impermissible, and courts must adhere to previous orders regarding necessary party impleadment.
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
