The petitioner challenged the rejection of an application to amend a written statement. The court held that given the trial progress and evidence closure, the amendment could have been sought earlier. The decision was based on Order 6 Rule 17 CPC.
Application to amend written statement was refused.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
WP1546_11
MP
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 1546 OF 2011
Balkrishna Dadoba Suryawanshi and others Versus
Govind Baburao Warape
.. Petitioners
.. Respondent
Mr. Rahul P. Walvekar for Petitioners.
CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J. MARCH 04, 2011
P. C. :
By way of present petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 21st January 2011 vide which the application filed by the present petitioner for amendment of the written statement came to be rejected.
(B.R. GAVAI, J)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court erred in rejecting the petitioner's application to amend the written statement to implead a co-operative society.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Balkrishna Dadoba Suryawanshi
Govind Baburao Warape
B.R. Gavai
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
