Back
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA, J
Ravindra Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Smt. Vasudha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. civil suit for specific performance (Para 4) |
| 2. explanation regarding competency (Para 5) |
| 3. reliance on previous judgments (Para 6) |
| 4. no further amendment required (Para 7) |
| 5. no illegality in rejecting (Para 9) |
| 6. supervisory jurisdiction limitations (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
ORDER
The petitioner submits that he has been authorized by petitioner no.2 to argue the matter being his wife.
2. Learned counsel for the respondent no.3 submits that due to inadvertence the name of Shri Kushagra Jain has been mentioned in the order dated 13.02.2025, in fact, the respondent no.3 is being represented by Shri Kushagra Singh and vakalatnama will be filed during the course of the day.
3. The present petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by defendants nos.1 and 2 challenging the order dated 25.04.2023 passed by 4th Additional District Judge, Indore in Civil Suit No.7-A/2014, whereby, the application for amendment under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC in the WS has been rejected.
4. The respondent nos.1 and 2 has filed a civil suit for specific performance of contract. The defendant/petitioners filed their WS and thereafter, an amendment was made by the plaintiff whic
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
