Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
ANIL KSHETARPAL, HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, JJ
SH INDERJEET SINGH BINDRA – Appellant
Versus
SMT RAMESH KUMARI & ORS. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background regarding the appellant's claim. (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. prior legal proceedings and their outcomes. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. parties’ arguments on limitation issues. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. court's analysis of applicable limitation articles. (Para 16 , 18 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 5. implications of amendments on limitation. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29) |
| 6. court’s caution on amendments and their timing. (Para 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 7. limitations on the scope of review petitions. (Para 33 , 34 , 35) |
| 8. final conclusion on the appeal's merits. (Para 37) |
1. Through the present Appeal, the Appellant assails the correctness of the Judgment/Order dated 10.01.2025 [hereinafter referred to as ‘Impugned Order’] passed in Review Petition No. 10/2025, whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the Review Petition filed by the Appellant seeking review of the Order dated 18.11.2024. In the aforesaid Order, the learned Single Judge dismissed the application seeking amendment of the plaint on the ground that the application is barred by the period of limitation as the same has been sought after seven years of the institution of the suit and eight year
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
