Allowed

Somnath Damudeshmukh v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC6 Jan 2022WP/4894/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, in a writ petition, quashed an order rejecting a prayer for amendment and impleadment under Order VI Rule 17 and Order I Rule 10 CPC. The court held the amendment justified to avoid multiplicity of litigation, directing the petitioner to amend the suit within four weeks subject to a security deposit. The Court did not adjudicate the merits.

What did the court decide?

Order impugned dated 5th November, 2019 quashed; application allowed; petitioner directed to carry out amendments in Civil Suit No.91 of 2016 within four weeks upon deposit of cost.

Somnath Damudeshmukh Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

(22)-WP-4894-21.doc .

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

Digitally signed by BALAJI BALAJIGOVINDRAO GOVINDRAOPANCHAL PANCHAL Date: 2022.01.07 14:42:31 +0530

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.4894 OF 2021

¶5

Shri. Somnath Damudeshmukh ..Petitioner
Versus

¶6

The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ..Respondents

¶7

Mr. Harshal Mirashi, for the Petitioner.
Mr. S. D. Rayrikar, for Respondent No.1 – State.
Mr. D. J. Deshmukh, for Respondent No.2.

¶8

CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.

¶9

 DATE : 6th JANUARY, 2022

¶10

P.C.

¶11

1. Vide order impugned dated 5th November, 2019 passed
below Exh.23 prayer for amendment moved under Order VI Rule 17
along with impleadment of party under Order I Rule 10 came to be
rejected.

¶12

2. The prayer in the petition resisted by the learned
counsel Mr. D. J. Deshmukh appearing for respondent No.2 on the
ground that if the amendment is granted the nature of the relief
claimed in the suit will be substantially changed.

¶13

3. I have considered the submissions.

¶14

4. The trial in the suit is yet to commence. By way of

¶15

BGP. 1 o f 3

¶16

(22)-WP-4894-21.doc .

¶17

amendment, the petitioner in addition to earlier existing prayer of
permanent injunction has sought for declaration of ownership over
the suit property.

¶18

5. With the assistance of rival parties, I have perused the
pleadings.

¶19

6. It is the claim of the petitioner that his grandfather
became owner of the property after he was declared as protected
tenant.

¶20

7. Since he claimed to have inherited ownership over the
suit property, it is alleged that the cost declared by the revenue
authority was already paid. In my opinion, the amendment which
goes to the root of the matter needs to be granted. Even otherwise
the respondents/defendants are not taken by surprise and to avoid
further multiplicity of litigation, the prayer for amendment is very
much justified.

¶21

8. The amendment is sought in relation to the very subject
matter of the suit and the only improvement by way of amendment
is impleadment of parties i.e. sister of the plaintiff and the prayer for
declaration of ownership. In that view of the matter, in my opinion,
order impugned dated 5th November, 2019 passed below Exh.23
needs to be quashed and set aside. As such, the application below
Exh.23 stands allowed. The petitioner to carry out amendment in

¶22

BGP. 2 o f 3

¶23

(22)-WP-4894-21.doc .

¶24

Civil Suit No.91 of 2016 within four weeks from today subject to
deposit of cost of Rs.10,000/- before the Court below before
carrying out amendment.

¶25

9. As such, writ petition stands disposed of.

¶26

10. The Trial Court will be at liberty of apportionment of the
cost amount.

¶27

11. Needless to clarify that this Court has not gone into the
merits of the rival pleadings.

¶28

[NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.]

¶29

3 o f 3

¶30

BGP.

Somnath Damudeshmukh v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Somnath Damudeshmukh v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sangeeta Naresh Vedi Vs Naresh Haribhau Vedi

Sou. Puja Somnath Markad Vs Shri. Somnath Namdev Markad

Chetana Vinod Punamiya Vs Vinod Suresh Punamiya

Sitaram Govind Panse and Anr. Vs Laxman Govind Panse Since Decd through Lrs and Ors.

Sitaram Govind Panse and Anr. Vs Laxman Govind Panse Since Decd through Lrs

Mrs. Smita Deepak Agawane Vs Mr. Deepak Dattatray Agawane