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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Cal) 3874

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Shampa Dutt (Paul), J
Debashish Dutta – Appellant
Versus
Barsa Majhi – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Indranath Mukherjee, Mr. Sukanta Mondal
For the Respondents:

1. Supplementary affidavit filed be kept with the record. The civil revision has been preferred challenging an order No.13 dated 22nd July, 2024 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Serampore in Money Suit No.26 of 2021, rejecting the petitioner’s application for amendment of the plaint. Vide the order under challenge, the learned Trial Judge was pleased to reject the petitioners prayer for amendment of the plaint on the following findings:

“Considering the submission advanced by the Id.

Lawyer of the parties to the suit, I have perused the materials on record, wherefrom it appears to me that plaintiff by this proposed amendment petition is firstly rectify the classification of suit land from Bastu to Pukur. Secondly, he intends to insert the fact about the jointness of the property of Sarmishtha Dutta, Diganta Dutta, Debashis Dutta in place of exclusive ownership of plaintiff. Thirdly by this proposed amendment petition plaintiff also intends to implead the Sarmishtha Dutta as proforma defendant no. 10 and Fourthly, by this proposed amendment petition he intends to incorporate the fact that the property is looked after by Diganta Dutta on behalf of other owner.

On go

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