'Promotion Effected Long Ago Not To Be Disturbed': Supreme Court Sets Aside HC Order Quashing 13-Year-Old Promotion; Holds 'Laying Rules' Directory Not Mandatory "Mere Oral Assertion Or 'Data Loss' Letter Not Enough To Prove Driving Licence Validity; Owner Has Strict Duty To Ensure Renewal": Supreme Court Reinstates Insurer's Non-Liability, Applies 'Pay & Recover' Principle "Zero Tolerance To Corruption": Supreme Court Reinstates FIRs Against Karnataka Cops, Slams High Court For 'Mini-Trial' & Exceeding S.482 CrPC Powers ‘Ancillary Services Don't Override Carriage’: Supreme Court Upholds 7.5% Presumptive Income For Cruise Operators Under Section 44B IT Act, Rejects Revenue's Higher Tax Claim Division Bench Refuses To Quash FIR, Holds It Cannot Nullify Single Judge's Final Order Directing Registration Of Case: Allahabad High Court High Court Leave Under Clause XII Doesn't Protect Transferred Suits; Section 16 CPC Strictly Applies To City Civil Court In 'Suits For Land': Bombay High Court Joint Account Holder Who Didn't Sign The Dishonoured Cheque Cannot Be Prosecuted Under Section 138 NI Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Suits Cannot Be Consolidated If Parties, Properties, And Causes Of Action Are Different: Telangana High Court P&H High Court Halts All Construction In Mohali's Shivalik Foothills Over Failure To Demarcate 'Forest Land', Bars Land Sale No Embargo On Issuing Single Statutory Notice Under Section 138 NI Act For Multiple Dishonoured Cheques: Orissa High Court District Collector Has No Jurisdiction Under CrPC To Order Reopening Of Investigation Or Recall Of Closure Report: Madhya Pradesh High Court No Exclusive Monopoly Over Geographical Term 'Malabar' In Isolation; Protection Limited To Registered Composite Marks: Kerala High Court Person In 'De Facto' Control Is A Promoter Under Companies Act Even If Designated As Professional Director: Karnataka High Court

Amendment of Pleadings not Allowed After Dismissal of Suit: P&H HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The lower appellate court's decision to grant the plaintiff's request under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC for changing the plaint after the lawsuit was dismissed was reversed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, who also accepted a revision plea.

The Order VI Rule 7 CPC clearly prohibits revision of pleadings after the trial has begun, the Bench of Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya said, unless the court determines that the parties could not have raised an issue earlier while exercising reasonable diligence.

According to the court, a request for a modification based on the claim that the suit property could not be adequately explained because of an error cannot be a justification for approving the change.

In the current instance, the plaintiff filed a claim for possession of a property and also demanded accusations of unauthorised occupation. As a result of the plaintiff's inability to establish the defendant's ownership of the property, the trial court dismissed the lawsuit.

Due to an oversight, the plaintiff was unable to clarify the limits of the suit property when the lawsuit was dismissed, so he filed an application to amend the plaint. The lower court granted the application.

The trial court dismissed the lawsuit after the amendment was requested, and the amendment aimed to close the loopholes that the trial court had emphasised in its dismissal order, the High Court stated in its decision on appeal.

According to the High Court, approving the modification would violate Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC in this situation.

Paramjit Singh

VS

Punjab Wakf Board

Download Judgment

[gview file="http://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/CR_5822_2017_29_10_2022_FINAL_ORDER.pdf"]

Latest Legal News