VIVEK RUSIA
Shanti Patidar – Appellant
Versus
Santosh – Respondent
1. The petitioners/plaintiffs have filed present writ petition being aggrieved by the order dated 13.1.2017, by which the application under Order 6 rule 17 of CPC seeking amendment in the plaint has been rejected.
2. The petitioners/plaintiffs filed the suit for declaration, partition and possession along with the mesne profit against the defendants in respect of the agricultural land on various survey numbers of Gram – Manawar. The plaintiffs have claimed ½ share in the total land of area 5.865 hectors.
3. After notice, the defendants No.1 and 2 filed written statement denying averments made in the plaint, thereafter, issues were framed and the case was fixed for plaintiffs' evidence and before they starting his evidence, an application under Order 6 rule 17 of CPC was filed seeking amendment in para 2 of the plaint. By way of amendment the plaintiffs wanted to make pleadings in respect of adoption of Ghisalal by Hiraji. The aforesaid application was opposed by the defendants on the ground that the fact of adoption came to the knowledge of the plaintiffs in the year 2011 when the written statement was filed. Thereafter the issues have been framed and the case has been fixed for
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.