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

2024 Supreme(Online)(AP) 22238

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
3458 - KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA
NIMMITHI JEEVARATNAM – Appellant
Versus
RAPAKA VENKATA RATNAM – Respondent


ORDER:-

The Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 16.12.2019 in I.A.No.885 of 2019 in O.S.No.256 of 2018 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Bhimavaram.

2. The application filed Order 6 Rule 17, seeking amendment of the written statement in suit filed by the respondent herein for recovery of money of Rs.7,97,334/-. During the course of trial, the instant application is filed for amendment of the pleadings. It is contended that the suit debt was discharged and the said receipt was not traced out.

3. Heard Smt. A.Jayanthi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri V.V.L.N.Sarma, learned counsel for the respondent.

The issues that arise for consideration in the Revision are:

i) Whether the defendant can be permitted to take inconsistent stands in the written statement?

ii) Whether the same can be raised after commencement of trial?

4. The counsel for petitioner in support of her contention that the defendant can take inconsistent stands, relies on the following decisions;

i) Baldev Singh & Others Vs. Manohar Singh & another ii) Rajesh Kumar Aggarwal and Others Vs. K.K.Modi & others 5. In Baldev Singh & Others Vs.

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