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

2024 Supreme(Online)(SC) 9888

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
DINESH GOYAL @ PAPPU – Appellant
Versus
SUMAN AGARWAL (BINDAL) – Respondent


J U D G M E N T

SANJAY KAROL, J.

Leave granted.

2. Impugned in this appeal is a judgment and order of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Gwalior Bench, passed in M.P. No.1695 of 2018 dated 21st August, 2019. The application filed under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of

1 2 Civil Procedure, 1908 , by respondent No.1 was allowed setting aside order dated 14th March, 2018 passed by the 8th Civil Judge, Class-2, Gwalior, Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by Dr.

Naveen Rawal Date: 2024.09.24

13:43:08 IST Reason:

1 ‘CPC’ for short

2 Hereinafter referred to as ‘the plaintiff’

District Gwalior in Civil Suit No.241-A/2016, whereby such application stood rejected.

3. The limited question that arises for our consideration is whether the High Court committed an error in allowing the amendment to the plaint filed by the present respondents.

4. The facts, shorn of unnecessary detail, as necessary for disposal of the present appeal are:-

3

4.1 The appellant and respondents, are siblings being children of Smt. Katoribai. The dispute relates to House No.27/1695, renumbered as 1695/1804 situated at Gangamai Santar, Murar, District Gwalior, M.P.4 , which was purchased by way of registered sale deed dated 1st J

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