Renewal Is Not Extension Unless Terms Are Fixed in Same Deed: Bombay High Court Strikes Down ₹64.75 Lakh Stamp Duty Demand on Nine-Year Lease Fraud Vitiates All Solemn Acts—Appointment Void Ab Initio Even After 27 Years: Allahabad High Court Litigants Cannot Be Penalised For Attending Criminal Proceedings Listed On Same Day: Delhi High Court Restores Civil Suit Dismissed For Default Limited Permissive Use Confers No Right to Expand Trademark Beyond Agreed Territories: Bombay High Court Enforces Consent Decree in ‘New Indian Express’ Trademark Dispute Assam Rifles Not Entitled to Parity with Indian Army Merely Due to Similar Duties: Delhi High Court Dismisses Equal Pay Petition Conspiracy Cannot Be Presumed from Illicit Relationship: Bombay High Court Acquits Wife, Affirms Conviction of Paramour in Murder Case Bail in NDPS Commercial Quantity Cases Cannot Be Granted Without Satisfying Twin Conditions of Section 37: Delhi High Court Cancels Bail Orders Terming Them ‘Perversely Illegal’ Article 21 Rights Not Absolute In Cases Threatening National Security: Supreme Court Sets Aside Bail Granted In Jnaneshwari Express Derailment Case A Computer Programme That Solves a Technical Problem Is Not Barred Under Section 3(k): Madras High Court Allows Patent for Software-Based Data Lineage System Premature Auction Without 30-Day Redemption Violates Section 176 and Bank’s Own Terms: Orissa High Court Quashes Canara Bank’s Gold Loan Sale Courts Can’t Stall Climate-Resilient Public Projects: Madras High Court Lifts Status Quo on Eco Park, Pond Works at Race Club Land No Cross-Examination, No Conviction: Gujarat High Court Quashes Customs Penalty for Violating Principles of Natural Justice ITAT Was Wrong in Disregarding Statements Under Oath, But Additions Unsustainable Without Corroborative Evidence: Madras High Court Deduction Theory Under Old Land Acquisition Law Has No Place Under 2013 Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Enhances Compensation for Metro Land Acquisition UIT Cannot Turn Around After Issuing Pattas, It's Estopped Now: Rajasthan High Court Private Doctor’s Widow Eligible for COVID Insurance if Duty Proven: Supreme Court Rebukes Narrow Interpretation of COVID-Era Orders Smaller Benches Cannot Override Constitution Bench Authority Under The Guise Of Clarification: Supreme Court Criticises Judicial Indiscipline Public Premises Act, 1971 | PP Act Overrides State Rent Control Laws for All Tenancies; Suhas Pophale Overruled: Supreme Court Court Has No Power To Reduce Sentence Below Statutory Minimum Under NDPS Act: Supreme Court Denies Relief To Young Mother Convicted With 23.5 kg Ganja Non-Compliance With Section 52-A Is Not Per Se Fatal: Supreme Court Clarifies Law On Sampling Procedure Under NDPS Act MBA Degree Doesn’t Feed the Stomach: Delhi High Court Says Wife’s Qualification No Ground to Deny Maintenance

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