In a Writ Petition, the Bombay High Court rejected an application challenging the Trial Court’s order dismissing an amendment of pleadings in a suit filed after 1st July 2001, holding it was consistent with Order VI Rule 17 CPC.
The writ petition was rejected.
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.
39.wpl.813.11
1
ssm
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 813 OF 2011
Shri Sopan R. Shelar ....Petitioner Versus Shri. Mansing N. Botre and others ....Respondents
Mr. V. B. Tapkir for the Petitioners.
CORAM: B. R. GAVAI, J. DATED : 15TH MARCH, 2011
P.C.:
By this Petition, Petitioner challenges the order dated 24th
August, 2010, vide which an application filed for amendment to the
pleadings, came to be rejected.
39.wpl.813.11
2
ssm
the Civil Procedure Code, no error could be found with the order issued by the Trial Court and no interference is warranted. Hence, rejected.
(B. R. GAVAI, J)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the Trial Court’s order rejecting an application for amendment of pleadings in a suit filed after 1st July 2001 when trial had already commenced.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shri Sopan R. Shelar
Shri. Mansing N. Botre
B. R. Gavai
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
