Writ petition challenging the trial court's observation that withdrawal and fresh filing is impermissible when amendment is available. The High Court directed that the petitioner is free to apply for amendment and the trial court must consider it on merits without being swayed by prior observations.
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.
{1}
wp630-15
drp
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.630 OF 2015
Bharu Savitri Athare
PETITIONER
VERSUS
Ambadas Kesu Sase (Died) LRs & others RESPONDENTS
Mr. Santosh S. Jadhavar, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Rahul R. Karpe, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 4
[CORAM : SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J.]
DATE : 28th SEPTEMBER, 2015
ORDER :
{2} wp630-15
the plaintiff appears to have realized that incorporation of certain pleadings is necessary in the suit for getting effective adjudication of rights of the parties. If that be so, if it can be brought about by another efficacious remedy available by way of amendment, the consideration which has weighed with the trial court, observations in paragraph No.8 of the impugned order shall not preclude the petitioner from making a proper application and that be considered by the court upon its own merits, and the court shall not be swayed away by the observations under paragraph No.8 of the impugned order.
of.
[SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J.]
drp/wp630-15
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is precluded from applying for amendment of plaint after the trial court observed that withdrawal and fresh filing is not permitted when amendment is available.
Bharu Savitri Athare
Ambadas Kesu Sase (Died) LRs & others
Sunil P. Deshmukh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
