Allowed

Krishnarao @ Kisan S/O Narayanrao Urkude and Another v. Ashok S/O Keshav Zade and Others

Bombay HC1 Apr 2024WP/1717/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging the rejection of an amendment application before trial commencement in a suit for declaration and injunction, the High Court of Bombay Nagpur Bench held that the trial court erred. It directed the impugned order be quashed and allowed the amendment due to the tardy nature and specific documentary needs of the plaintiffs as protected tenants.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 31st January, 2018 in Regular Civil Suit No. 38 of 2018 passed by JCC, Rajura is quashed and set aside, and the application for amendment is allowed.

Krishnarao @ Kisan S/O Narayanrao Urkude and Another Vs… — Landlord and Tenant | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-NAG:3857

¶2

1/5 35-wp-1717-18(j).odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 1717 OF 2018

¶5

Krishnarao @ Kisan son of Narayanrao Urkude, aged about 91 years, OccuAgriculturist (dead)

¶6

1(a) Sulochana Dattatray Balki, aged about 68 years, Occupation : Housewife, R/o Near by Ganesh Temple, Ganesh Nagar, Tukum, Chandrapur

¶7

1(b) Sudha Vasant Musale, age about 63 years, Occupation-Housewife R/o near Gond Raja Wada, Samadhi Ward, Chandrapur

¶8

1(c) Sanjivani Wd/o Pravin Urkude, age about 56 years, Occupation-housewife, R/o Nearby Mahadeo Temple, Samadhi Ward, Chandrapur

¶9

1(d) Bhagyesh S/o Pravin Urkude, age about 30 years, occupation – Private R/o Nearby Mahadeo Temple, Samadhi Ward, Chandrapur

¶10

1(e) Dilip S/o Krushnarao Urkude, age about 58 years, occupation – retired R/o Plot no. 39, Talmale Estate, Renghe Nagar, Trimurty Nagar, Ranapratap Nagar, Nagpur

¶11

Natthu S/o Nanaji Urkude, aged about 77 years, Occupation : Agriculturist (dead) Legal heirs of petitioner no.2.

¶12

1] Shakuntala Wd/o Natthuji Urkude (wife) Aged 75 years, Occupation – Housewife R/o Marada, Post Bhoyegaon, Tah-Rajura, District Chandrapur.

¶13

2] Gita Vijay Zade (Daughter), Age 50 years, Occupation- Housewife R/o 154, Hanuman Mandir Samoril Baju,

Sknair

35-wp-1717-18(j).odt

2/5

Pellora, Taluka-Rajura, Dist. Chandrapur 3] Vijay Natthuji Urkude (Son), Age 49 years, Occupation – Service R/o 16, Marda, Taluka-Rajura, Dist.Chandrapur 4] Lata d/o Sunil Zade (Daughter) Aged 48 years, Occupation -Housewife, At Pellora, Post-Sakhari, Tah-Rajura, Pellora, Chandrapur, Sakhari, Maharashtra-442905.

¶18

...Petitioners

¶19

// VERSUS //

¶20

Ashok S/o Keshav Zade, Aged about 42 years, Occupation – Agriculturist, Resident of Village Nimani, Post Bhakhardi, Tahsil-Korpana, Dist. Chandrapur 2. Smt. Ramabai W/o Dattuji Kshirsagar (dead) Legal heirs of respondent no.2. 2a] Shri Sanjay S/o Dattuji Kshirsagar, Age 48 Years, Occu-Agriculturist R/o C/o Avinash Chiwande, nearby Mata Temple Ward No.5, tadayi post-tadayi, Taluka – ChandrapurDist.Chandrapur 2b] Shri Ajay S/o Dattuji Kshirsagar, Age 42 years, Occ-Agriculturist R/o Ward No.5, Gadchandur, PostGadchandur, Tah. Korpana, Dist. Chandrapur 2c] Shri Vijay S/o Dattuji Kshirsagar, Aged 42 years, Occupation – Agriculturist R/o In front of akhil Maharashtra gurav samaj temple, new Subhedar layout, Nagpur 440 024 2d] Sau. Vaishali W/o Anil Pandey, Age 40 years, Occu- Household R/o Ward No.5, Gadchandur, Post

¶21

Sknair

¶22

3/5 35-wp-1717-18(j).odt

¶23

Gadchandur, Tah. Korpana, District Chandrapur 3. Govindrao S/o Annaji Shawankar (dead) Legal heirs of respondent no.3 3(a) Smt. Rekha wd/o Govindrao Shiwankar (widow) Aged 58 years, Occ. Household 3b) Sau. Rupa Ajay Kshirsagar, Age 38 years, Occu. Household 3c) Shri Ravindra Govindrao Shiwankar, Age 38 years, Occu. Agriculturist 3d) Sau. Savita Manohar Kirtane, Age 41 years, Occu. Household 3e) Shri Ishwar Govindrao Shiwankar Age 34 years, Occu. Household All R/o Ward no.5, Gadchandur, PostGadchandur, Tah. Korpana, District Chandrapur

¶24

3f) Sau. Aruna Satish Makode, Aged about 32 years, Occ.: Household R/o House no.22, Ward No.5, Shivankar Layout, Behind Post Office Gadchandur, Post-Gadchandur, Tah. Korpana, Dist. Chandrapur 442908

¶25

And also at Pooja Genral Store, Shivaji Chowk, Gadchandur, Post-Gadchandur, Tah. Korpana, Dist. Chandrapur Pin Code 442908

¶26

... Respondents

¶27

Shri Prasad Arvind Abhyankar, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri Nitin R. Bhishikar, Advocate for the legal heirs of respondent no.1.

¶28

CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR, J. DATED : 1^st APRIL, 2024.

¶29

ORAL JUDGMENT :

¶30

Sknair

¶31

4/5 35-wp-1717-18(j).odt

¶32

Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties.

¶33

The order dated 31^st January, 2018 passed by the learned Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Rajura in Regular Civil Suit No. 38 of 2018, thereby rejecting the application moved by the plaintiffs for amendment of plaint, is the subject matter of challenge in this writ petition.

¶34

In a suit for declaration and permanent injunction, it is the case of the plaintiffs that, the plaintiffs are the protected tenants which fact the plaintiffs want to elaborate by way of amendment that too before commencement of the trial. However, the same has been rejected on the ground that it will change the nature of dispute.

¶35

However, after going through the pleadings in the plaint and the proposed amendment, I am of the opinion that the learned trial Court has committed error in rejecting the application. It is a settled law, if the application for amendment is moved, prior to commencement of the trial, a lenient view has to be taken by the learned trial Court.

¶36

In the present matter, the plaintiffs have pointed out that they came across certain documents subsequent to the filing of the suit and on perusal of such documents, it is necessary to elaborate the point of protected tenants and to add one prayer clause.

¶37

Thus, considering the nature of amendment and the fact that the same has been moved prior to commencement of the trial, I am of the

¶38

Sknair

¶39

5/5 35-wp-1717-18(j).odt

¶40

opinion that the amendment needs to be allowed. Accordingly, I pass the following order.

¶41

i. The writ petition is allowed;

¶42

ii. The order dated 31^st January, 2018 passed by the learned Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Rajura in Regular Civil Suit No. 38 of 2018 is hereby quashed and set aside and thereby application Exhibit 57 for amendment is allowed.

¶43

Sknair

Krishnarao @ Kisan S/O Narayanrao Urkude and Another v. Ashok S/O Keshav Zade and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishnarao @ Kisan S/O Narayanrao Urkude and Another v. Ashok S/O Keshav Zade and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pramod Girdharilal Malani Vs Smt. Vanmala Ramdas Kapse and Others

Suraj Ramesh Gadekar vs State of Maharashtra

Jitendra Yadunath Patel vs the State of Maharashtra

Jyoti Prakash Londhe vs State of Maharashtra

Laxmikant Yatiraj Bihani vs the State of Maharashtra

Jaysingh Balasaheb Katke vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.