Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AT AGARTALA
Aparesh Kumar Singh
Putul Rani Debbarma – Appellant
Versus
Biplab Debnath, Son of Sri Jiban Debnath – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner’s claim of ownership and necessary amendments. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding the necessity and implications of amendments. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. court's rationale for allowing amendments based on subsequent events. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. legal provisions relating to amendments in ongoing suits. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 5. final order allowing the amendments and disposing the petition. (Para 14 , 15) |
ORDER :
Aparesh Kumar Singh, C.J.
Heard Mr. Abhijit Sengupta, learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff-petitioner and Mr. Tapash Datta Majumder, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Dalit Kalai, learned counsel appearing for the defendant-respondents.
2. Title Suit No.5/2022 has been instituted by the petitioner-plaintiff for declaration that she is the owner of brick-kiln, chimney and reactor running in the name and style of ‘M/s Tripureswari Bricks Company’ Amarpur being inherited from her deceased daughter, Rupali Debbarma. She also sought mandatory injunction against the defendant-respondents, their men, agents and labourers not to use the said brick-kiln, chimney and reactor. She has also prayed for realization of an amount of Rs.1,26,000/- as remunerat
The court can permit amendments to pleadings relating to subsequent events to facilitate justice, provided they do not introduce new causes of action or fundamentally alter the suit's nature.
Amendments to pleadings under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC are permissible if they do not change the fundamental character of the suit and aim to avoid multiplicity of proceedings.
Amendments to pleadings should be allowed to determine the real controversy between parties, emphasizing a liberal approach to avoid multiplicity of litigation.
In a suit for specific performance of contract, plaintiff may also claim compensation for its breach in addition to such performance.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the provisions of Sections 21 and 40 of the Specific Relief Act and Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C mandate the court to allow the plaintiff to seek an ....
An amendment can only be allowed if it is necessary for deciding the real controversy between the parties regarding the pending suit and not beyond that.
Amendments to pleadings post-trial commencement are not permissible unless due diligence is shown, ensuring they do not alter the fundamental character of the case.
The Court may allow amendment of pleadings at any stage of the proceedings for just decision of the case and to determine the real questions in controversy between the parties.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
