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

1990 Supreme(MP) 393

R.C.LAHOTI
Ramesh Dutt S/O Bhogiram Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Dev S/O Bhogiram Sharma – Respondent


ORDER

R.C. Lahoti, J.

1. Law as to amendment of pleadings contained in Rule 17 of Order 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been subject-matter of discussion in umpteen number of cases. The general principles are so well settled by the law laid down by the Apex Court, also illuminated in several decisions of this Court, as hardly need to be reviewed and restated. For principles see - Ganesh Trading Co. v. Moti Ram, AIR 1978 SC 484; Jai Jai Ram Manohar Lal v. National Building Material Supply, AIR 1969 SC 1267; L. J. Leach and Co. Ltd. and Anr. v. Messrs Jardine Skinner and Co., AIR 1957 SC 357 and P. H. Patil v. Kalgonda Shequonda Patil and Ors., AIR 1957 SC 363. Nevertheless, the difficulty faced by subordinate Courts while dealing with an application seeking an amendment resultinng in withdrawal of admission contained in the pleadings can be understood. The present one is such a case.

2. A bare reading of Rule 17 shows that once the Court has formed an opinion that the amendment prayed for is necessary for the purpose of determining the real question in controversy between the parties, it shall be allowed. In other matters, the Court has been conferred with a discretion in pe


























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