SUJOY PAUL
Bhaiyalal – Appellant
Versus
Bundabai – Respondent
Judgment
Sujoy Paul, J.;-
1. By invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution, the petitioners/defendants have challenged the order dated 30.09.2011, whereby application under Order 14 Rule 5 of CPC for framing additional issues is rejected by the court below. Shri N.K. Gupta, learned Counsel for the petitioners, submits that in the plaint, the date of death of Narayan Prasad is shown as Samvat 2025, whereas in the written statement the date of death is disputed and it is alleged that the real date of death is Samvat 2010. He submits that the said date of death has relevance to decide whether the legal representatives are entitled for particular benefits and, therefore, the court below has erred in not framing the issues regarding date of death of the said person.
2. Shri Gupta criticized the order and stated that his application under Order 14 Rule 5 of CPC (Annexure P-4) should have been allowed by the court below. Shri Gupta submits that a pleading of plaint is specifically denied by the defendants and, therefore, as per Order 14 Rule 1 of CPC, the aforesaid issues should have been framed.
3. Per Contra, Shri S.K. Sharma, learned Counsel for the respo
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.