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

2006 Supreme(MP) 978

A.M.NAIK
Munni Gupta – Appellant
Versus
Asha Singh – Respondent


Advocates:
Greeshm Jain for petitioner; P.K. Saxena for respondents.

ORDER


1. This writ petition is directed against the order contained in Annexure P-1 whereby the proposed amendment has been denied by the learned Trial Judge on the ground of limitation.


2. The suit in question has been filed for declaration and perpetual injunction with respect to an immovable property. By the proposed amendment, the plaintiffs wanted to incorporate certain facts that the suit property was let out by the plaintiff to Shri Rajbahoran Singh on rent @ Rs. 150/- per month. Rajboharan Singh vacated the suit premises but did not hand it over to the plaintiff. The defendant in collusion with Rajbahoran Singh, occupied the disputed property in May, 1991 in an illegal and unauthorised manner. Accordingly, the prayer for possession has also been sought to be incorporated.


3. The proposed amendment was contested by the defendant on the ground that prayer for possession in the year 2006 is barred by limitation since, the suit property is stated to have been occupied by the defendant in May, 1991. Learned Trial Judge did not allow to incorporate the amendment on the ground that the prayer for possession has become barred by limitation.


4. Shri Greeshm Jain, learned cou







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