Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
T.V. Thamilselvi, J
Neelanathan – Appellant
Versus
N.K.Nagan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction of the case, background facts and the application for amendment. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments of plaintiff and defendants on amendment after commencement of trial. (Para 3) |
| 3. court observes that the nature of the property to be decided after trial. (Para 4) |
| 4. civil revision petition allowed; order of trial court set aside. (Para 5) |
ORDER
Challenging the impugned order dated 20.02.2026 passed in I.A.No. 4 of 2025 in OS No. 67 of 2011 by the Special Subordinate Court for LAOP Cases, Tiruvallur, the plaintiff has preferred this revision.
2. The plaintiff has filed an application before the trial court under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC to permit to amend the plaint in respect of the shares. The plaint was amended after impleading his sisters as defendants 7 & 8. But the court below failed to appreciate such application and erroneously dismissed the application. Aggrieved over the same, the plaintiff has preferred this revision.
3. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submits that the revision petitioner as plaintiff filed the suit for partition before the trial court in the year 2011 and now his sisters also impleaded as defendants 7 & 8 and inclusion o
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
