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

2011 Supreme(MP) 791

SANJAY YADAV
Satish Chandra Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Sheela Sharma – Respondent


Advocates:
Girish Shrivastava for petitioner; H.R. Naidu for respondent.

ORDER

1. With consent of learned counsel for the parties, matter heard finally.

2. Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against order dated 5.7.2011 passed by Fourth Civil Judge, Class-I, Jabalpur in Civil Suit No. 68-A/2009; whereby an application under Order 6 Rule 17 and under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the CPC’) has been rejected.

3. Suit by the petitioner, through his wife, against respondent, wife of petitioner’s son, is for mandatory injunction and for possession of House No. 1848/1849, situated at New Shobhapur Colony, Gokalpur Ward, Jabalpur.

4. Experiencing the difficulty in prosecuting the matter because of the ailment, (as per petitioner, he has to take treatment at Pune in regular intervals) therefore, in order to effectively plead the case, he filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the CPC. Petitioner also filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of CPC proposing amendment by incorporating certain facts regarding the suit property and correction of the date of sale deed.

5. Trial Court rejected the application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the CPC on the ground that the pl











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