A Drafting Error Cannot Override Constitutional Rights: Rajasthan High Court Directs Correction In Udaipur Master Plan–2031 To Uphold Property Rights Uttering That a Woman Is a Prostitute in Public Can Amount to Abetment of Suicide: Bombay High Court Declines to Quash FIR Under Section 306 IPC PMLA | Stay on Predicate Offence Eclipses Money Laundering Probe; NBWs Cancelled for Cooperating Accused: Allahabad High Court Falsus in Uno, Falsus in Omnibus Not Applicable in Criminal Law: Patna High Court Mere Loan Default Doesn’t Justify Look Out Circular Without Criminality: Delhi High Court Rejects Bank of Baroda’s Appeal Consent, Not Calendar, Governs Divorce by Mutual Consent: Delhi High Court Says Separation and Cooling-Off Periods Under Hindu Marriage Act Can Be Waived Termination Without Hearing Violates Natural Justice: Gauhati High Court Quashes Railway Contract Rescission Right To Speedy Trial Cannot Override Statutory Bar Of NDPS Act: J&K High Court Denies Bail For Commercial Drug Offence Despite 3.5 Years Custody Inheritance Isn’t Lost in Whispered Settlements: Kerala High Court Says Oral Family Claims Can’t Defeat Sisters’ Equal Share Suit Barred by Law Must Be Dismissed at Threshold – No Evidence Needed When Limitation is Clear from the Plaint Itself: Madhya Pradesh High Court Admission That Plaintiff’s Gate Opens onto Disputed Land Clinches Case — No Ownership Proven, Common Passage Must Be Preserved: Punjab & Haryana High Court Axis Bank Must Refund ₹8.20 Crores Withdrawn in Violation of Trial Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Reasserts Judicial Supremacy Permissive Possession Is Not Adverse Possession: Punjab & Haryana High Court Overturns Ownership Claim Over Agricultural Land Registered Sale Deeds Carry Presumption of Ownership; Benami Plea Unsustainable Without Cogent Proof: Madras High Court Grants Partition Eligibility Criteria Must Have Rational Nexus With Objective: Orissa High Court Upholds ₹9 Crore Turnover Requirement In Hospital Diet Tender Mere Multiplicity of Ailments Is Not Ground for Bail Under UAPA: J&K High Court Dismisses Medical Bail Plea of Mian Abdul Qayoom Executing Court Cannot Direct Third Parties to Enforce Arbitral Orders Beyond Their Legal Limits: Delhi High Court Sets Aside CoA Order Against Jamia Hamdard Administrative Officer Can’t Question Validity of Registered Adoption Deed: Allahabad High Court Quashes Rejection of Compassionate Appointment Delay of Over Two Months in Eyewitness Disclosure is Inexplicable and Erodes the Core of the Prosecution’s Case: Bombay High Court Acquits Two Men Convicted of Murder Litigants Must Not Suffer for Clerical Errors Committed by the Court: Bombay High Court Allows Delayed Defence in Sibling Defamation Suit Courts Cannot Conduct a Mini-Trial at Cognizance Stage—Delhi High Court Upholds Summoning in SC/ST Act, IPC Case Involving Police Officer Liberty Cannot Override the Horrors of Lynching: Bombay High Court Denies Bail in Palghar Mob Killing Case Exorbitant Damages Without Proof Are Unsustainable: Madhya Pradesh High Court Strikes Down ₹3.84 Lakh Monthly Damage Order Against Industrial Occupant Specialization Cannot Be Used as a Tool for Harassment: Allahabad High Court Quashes Mid-Term Transfer of Law Officer for Violating Bank's Transfer Policy Delay in Passing Arbitral Award Not Sufficient to Invalidate It Unless Prejudice Is Proven: Bombay High Court Upholds ₹43 Crore Arbitral Award Against Director-Guarantor Builder Disputes Can't Be Dressed as Criminal Offences to Seek FIRs: Delhi High Court Dismisses Writ Seeking CBI Probe Against NBCC Mere Plea of Oral Partition Not Sufficient Without Corroborative Evidence: Karnataka High Court Plaintiff Cannot Claim 2/3 Share Without Proving Settlement or Joining All Co-Heirs: Madras High Court Manipulation of Public Issue, Ante-Dated Stock-Invests by Chartered Accountant Unbecoming of the Profession: Delhi High Court Suspends ICAI Member for One Year Allegations Show Continuing Offence— MP High Court Declines to Quash FIR Against NRI Husband, In-Laws Accused of Dowry Demands and Cruelty

Minor Omissions in Counter-Claim Filing Not Grounds for Dismissal: Kerala High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal decision, Justice A. Badharudeen of the Kerala High Court clarified the treatment of minor omissions in the filing of counter-claims. The judgment, which pertained to a property dispute, has far-reaching implications for legal practice and procedure.

 Justice Badharudeen observed, “Omissions in the form and content of the counter-claim shall not be grounds for dismissal in the interest of justice.” This ruling reinforces the principle that technical irregularities in legal documents should not hinder access to justice.

 The case involved a dispute between a plaintiff and defendant over property ownership. The plaintiff had asserted title to certain properties, while the defendant based their claim on documents. The plaintiff failed to substantiate their claims, and the defendant’s evidence supported their ownership rights. Both the trial court and the appellate court had confirmed the defendant’s title and possession, a decision upheld by Justice Badharudeen.

 Additionally, in a related matter, the plaintiff had sought additional time to vacate the disputed property. The defendant, citing financial difficulties, opposed this request. The judgment granted the plaintiff two months to vacate the property, with the condition that they file an affidavit within three weeks confirming their commitment. Failure to file the affidavit within the specified time will void the extension.

 This ruling serves as a reminder that the essence of justice should not be overshadowed by technicalities, and that the courts should consider the interests of all parties involved. It sets a precedent for future cases involving counter-claims and emphasizes the need for a fair and equitable legal process.

 Legal experts and practitioners are already discussing the implications of this judgment, with some heralding it as a significant step towards a more accessible and just legal system.

 Advocate R. Sunil Kumar represented the plaintiff, while Advocate Hena Bahuleyan represented the defendant in this case.

 Date of Decision: September 5, 2023

ANIL KUMAR vs   SUNIL KUMAR

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/AnilKumar_Vs_Sunil_05Sep23_KerlHC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News