Writ petition challenging rejection of a defendant's application to amend the written statement in a civil suit. The High Court found no explanation satisfying the proviso to Order VI Rule 17 CPC for moving the amendment after trial commenced and dismissed the petition.
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.
1 933-179-2024.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 179/2024
Santosh S/o Ramratan Atole Vs.
Amol S/o Prakash Atole and others
Office Notes, Office Memoranda Court's or Judge's orders of Coram, Appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders
Mr. A.S. Dhore, Advocate for petitioner Mr. Nikhil Waghmare, Adv. h/f Mr. P.B Patil,Adv. for Respondents
CORAM: N.R. BORKAR, J.
DATED : 26th JULY, 2024
This petition takes exception to the order dated 11.08.2023, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Lonar below Exh.17 in Regular Civil Suit No.50/2019. By the order impugned the trial Court has rejected the application filed by the present petitioner / defendant for amendment of written statement.
2 933-179-2024.odt
amendment application on the ground that trial of the suit has commenced.
(N.R. BORKAR, J.)
MP Deshpande
Signed by: Mr. M.P. Deshpande Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 13/08/2024 18:42:41
1 issue framed by the court
Should the trial court's rejection of the defendant's application to amend the written statement be interfered with, given no explanation for delay after commencement of trial under proviso to Order V
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Santosh S/o Ramratan Atole
Amol S/o Prakash Atole
N.R. Borkar
As recorded by the court registry
5 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
