Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
J.SREENIVAS RAO
M.Ram Reddy, S/o. late Veera Reddy (died per LR’s) – Appellant
Versus
LITE Crete Constructions Industries Private Limited, rep. by its partners – Respondent
ORDER :
J.SREENIVAS RAO, J.
This civil revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, aggrieved by the order dated 10.03.2025 passed by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sangareddy, in I.A.No.95 of 2024 in O.S.No.173 of 2017, whereby the application filed by the petitioners seeking amendment of the plaint was dismissed.
2. Heard Sri Venkat Raghu Ramulu, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Sri R.Rama Brahmma, learned counsel for respondent No.3.
3. The revision petitioners herein are the plaintiffs and the respondents are the defendants in O.S.No.173 of 2017. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as they were arrayed in the suit in O.S.No.173 of 2017 before the Court below.
4. Brief facts of the case:
4.1. Plaintiff No.1-M.Ram Reddy filed suit in O.S.No.154 of 2007 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Sangareddy against respondent No.1/defendant No.1 for specific performance of agreement of sale and perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule property i.e. Ac.3-00 of land covered by Survey Nos.833 part, 834 part, 836 part, 837 part and 838 part at Patancheru Village and Mandal, Sangareddy District (ers
A court can deny amendment requests under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC if due diligence is lacking after trial commencement.
Amendments to pleadings after trial commencement are impermissible unless due diligence is shown; plaintiffs failed to justify the late amendment request.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the court may allow an amendment if it is imperative for proper adjudication of the case, and to avoid injustice and multiplicity of litigatio....
Point of law: High Court can interfere in exercise of its power of superintendence, when there has been a patent perversity in the orders of the Tribunals and Courts subordinate to it or where there ....
Amendments to pleadings must be made in good faith and should not cause prejudice to the opposing party, especially if they seek to withdraw prior admissions.
The petitioners can be permitted to withdraw the suit to file a fresh suit, and they are liable to satisfy the law of limitation while filing the fresh suit.
Amendments to a plaint are permissible for effective resolution of disputes, but claims that are time-barred cannot be allowed, especially when they would divest the opposing party of accrued rights.
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
