Government Can Resume Leased Land For Public Purpose; 'Substantial Compliance' Of 60-Day Notice Sufficient: Kerala High Court Revenue Can't Cite Pending Litigation to Justify One Year of Adjudication Inaction: Karnataka High Court Limitation | 1,142 Days of Silence: Orissa High Court Rejects Litigant's Claim That His Lawyer Never Called SC/ST Act's Bar on Anticipatory Bail Does Not Apply When Complaint Fails to Make Out Prima Facie Case: Karnataka High Court Oral Agreement for Sale Cannot Be Dismissed for Want of Stamp or Registration: Calcutta High Court Upholds Injunction Finance Company's Own Legal Manager Cannot Appoint Arbitrator — Award Passed by Such Arbitrator Is Non-Est and Inexecutable: Andhra Pradesh High Court District Court Cannot Remand Charity Commissioner's Order: Bombay High Court Division Bench Settles Conflicting Views Framing "Points For Determination" Not Always Mandatory For First Appellate Courts: Allahabad High Court Delhi HC Finds Rape Conviction Cannot Stand On Testimony Where Victim Showed 'Unnatural Concern' For Her Alleged Attacker Limitation in Partition Suit Cannot Be Decided Without Evidence: Karnataka High Court Cheque Dishonour Accused Can Probabilise Defence Without Entering Witness Box — Through Cross-Examination And Marked Documents Alone: Madras High Court Contributory Negligence | No Driving Licence and Three on a Motorcycle Cannot Mean the Victim Caused the Accident: Rajasthan High Court LL.B Degree Cannot Be Ground to Deny Maintenance to Divorced Wife: Gujarat High Court Dried Leaves and Branches Are Not 'Ganja': Delhi High Court Grants Bail Under NDPS Act Family Court Judge Secretly Compared Handwriting Without Telling Wife, Then Punished Her Hesitation: Delhi High Court Quashes Divorce Decree Co-Owner Can Sell Undivided Share in Joint Property Without Consent of Other Co-owners — Sale Deed Valid to Extent of Transferor's Share: Orissa High Court Mandatory Safeguards of Section 42 NDPS Cannot Be Bypassed — Even When 1329 Kg of Hashish Is Seized: Gujarat High Court Affirms Acquittal

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