This High Court dismissed a writ petition under Article 227 challenging a trial court order rejecting an application to amend the prayer clause of a plaint. The bench upheld the trial court's decision that the proposed amendment was vague and not a mere clarification, noting that specific reliefs must be stated as per Order 7 Rule 7 CPC.
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
CGHC010358962026
2026:CGHC:40511
NAFR
Digitally signed SUMIT by SUMITKUMARDate: KUMAR 2026.09.1711:51:38 +0530
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WP227 No. 1199 of 2026
1 - Abhisek Shukla S/p Late Tulsikant Shukla Aged About 40 Years Resident Of Bhatapara, Tehsil Bhatapara, District Balodabazar -Bhatapara (C.G.) Agriculturist Village Kumharkhan, Tehsil Bhatapara District Balodabazar - Bhatapara (C.G.) (Details As Per Plaints)
2 - Shrikant Shukla S/o Late Balbhadra Prasad Shukla Aged About 71 Years Resident Of Bhatapara, Tehsil Bhatapara, District Balodabazar -Bhatapara (C.G.) Agriculturist Village Kumharkhan, Tehsil Bhatapara District Balodabazar -Bhatapara (C.G.) (Details As Per Plaints)
3 - Nitin Shukla S/o Late Amarkant Shukla, Aged About 49 Years Resident Of Bhatapara, Tehsil Bhatapara, District Balodabazar -Bhatapara (C.G.) Agriculturist Village Kumharkhan, Tehsil Bhatapara District Balodabazar - Bhatapara (C.G.) (Details As Per Plaints)
4 - Praveen Shukla S/o Late Amarkant Ahukla, Aged About 43 Years Resident Of Bhatapara, Tehsil Bhatapara, District Balodabazar -Bhatapara (C.G.) Agriculturist Village Kumharkhan, Tehsil Bhatapara District Balodabazar - Bhatapara (C.G.) (Details As Per Plaints)
... Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - Anil Kumar Shukla S/o Late Bipin Bihari Shukla, Aged About 69 Years Resident Of Village Kumharkhan Tehsil Bhatapara, District Balodabazar - Bhatapara (C.G.)
2 - Aman Kumar Shukla S/o Anil Kumar Shukla, Aged About 40 Years Resident Of Village Kumharkhan Tehsil Bhatapara, District Balodabazar - Bhatapara (C.G.)
3 - Yaman Kumar Shukla S/o Anil Kumar Shukla Aged About 36 Years Resident Of Village Kumharkhan Tehsil Bhatapara, District Balodabazar - Bhatapara (C.G.)
4 - Naveen Shukla S/o Late Bipin Bihari Shukla Aged About 55 Years Resident Of Civil Line, Bhatapara, Tehsil Bhatapara, District Balodabazar - Bhatapara (C.G.)
2
5 - Manish Shukla S/o Late Surendra Shukla, Aged About 40 Years Resident Of Village Kumharkhan Tehsil Bhatapara, District Balodabazar -Bhatapara (C.G.)
6 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar -Bhatapara (C.G.)
... Respondent(s)
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Praveen K. Dhurandhar, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Karan Kumar Baharani, P.L. for the State
(Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J.)
Order on Board
16/09/2026
3
learned trial Court by observing that the proposed amendment is vague and such vague amendment can not be permitted in the prayer clause of the plaint. He would further submit that it is only a clarification of the existing prayer clause, therefore, the same may be permitted to be incorporated in the prayer clause of the plaint. There is no prejudice is being caused to the defendants and they have every right to consequential amendment of their written statement. The suit is at its initial stage and issues have not been framed yet, therefore, the impugned order may be set aside and the petitioners may be permitted to carry out the necessary amendment in their plaint.
2-यहकि�मा�नन�यन्य�य�लयप्रकि�वा�दी�गण��किवारुद्धवा�दीभू!मिमा��से#ब#धामा� ��य�किनषे�धा�ज्ञा���किनण3यएवा# कि4क्री6 प�रिर��रप्रकि�वा�दी�गण�& स्वाय# य� अपन�अमिधान�& ��मा�ध्यमासे��&ईकिवावा�दीउत्पन्नन�र�, प्रवा�+ न�र�, एवा# हस्�क्ष�पकि�य�जो�न�से�प्रकि�ब#मिधा�कि�य�जो�न���जोयपत्रप्रदी�न�र�।
3-यहकि�वा�दी�गण�& प्रकि�वा�दी�गणसे�इसेवा�दी��से#प!ण3 वा�दीव् दिदील�य� जो�वा�।
4-यहकि�अन्यअन � &षेजो& मा�नन�यन्य�य�लयउचि)�सेमाझे�वा�दी�गण�& प्रकि�वा�दी�गणसे�प्रदी�न�र�ईजो�वा�।"
4
P-4) by which they sought amendment in their prayer clause-1 of the plaint which is also necessary to note here which reads as under:-
"यहकि�वा�दी�गणद्वा�र�अपन�वा�दीपत्र��)�ह�गय�अन � &षे�6 �किF�� 01 मा�स्पस्टरूपसे�खासेर�न#बर��उल्ल�खा�रन�भू!लगय�ह- जिजोसे�वाह से#+&मिधा��र��हुएस्पस्ट�रन�)�ह��ह- जिजोसे�मा�नन�यन्य�य�लय�� अन�माकि�से�अन � &षे�6 �किF�� 01 मा� "यहकि� ----ह�एवा# स्वात्वाह-" �� ब�दी " खसरा� 238 राकबा� 1.35 हे�०भू�मि�नदी�किकन�रा�बागी�चा�, बालभूद्र प्रस�दीशु�क्ल�अर्था��तवा�दी�गीणक�वा�रिरास�न" क�हे#, खसरा�न$बारा 293 राकबा� 0.84 हे�०भू�मि�शिशुवारा��प्रस�दीक�वा�रिरास�न" क& भू�मि�हे#, खसरा� न$बारा 511 राकबा� 1.25 हे�०भू�मि�क" प्रकितवा�दी�क��$क 01 अकिनल क���राशु�क्ल�न�प्या�रा�ल�लकि)त�शु�धु�रा��ग्रा��दीतरा,गी�क" किवाक्रयाकरा दिदीया�हे#, खसरा�न$बारा 620 राकबा� 2.21 हे�0 भू�मि�क" प्रकितवा�दी�क��$क 01 अकिनलक���राशु�क्ल�न�भूगीवात�प्रस�दीवा���ग्रा��अ�ल�डी�हेक" किवाक्रयाकरादिदीया�हे#, खसरा�न$बारा 604/1 त�ल�बाराकबा� 1.428 हे�०भू�मि� जो" किकबालभूद्रप्रस�दीशु�क्ल�क�वा�रिरास�न" अर्था��तवा�दी�गीणक�हे# खसरा�न$बारा 190 राकबा� 0.90 हे�०)राकिनर्मि�2त�क�न)राप्रकितवा�दी� क��$क 01 अकिनलक���राशु�क्ल�अ)न�किहेस्स�)राक�किबाजोहे# तर्था� बालभूद्रप्रस�दीशु�क्ल�क�वा�रिरास�नअर्था��तवा�दी�गीणअ)न�किहेस्स�)रा क�किबाजोहे# एवा$ प्रकितवा�दी�क��$क 06 �न�षशु�क्ल�अ)न�किहेस्स�)रा किनवा�सरातहे#, खसरा�न$बारा 196/1, 198 एवा$ 199 राकबा�क�शु6 0.02हे�० 0.02हे�० 0.02 हे�०बालभूद्रप्रस�दीक� वा�रिरास�न" अर्था��त वा�दी�गीणक�किहेस्स�क& भू�मि�हे#।खसरा�न$बारा 220 राकबा� 0.036 हे�० भू�मि�ई�ल�बा�डी�बालभूद्रप्रस�दीशु�क्ल�क�वा�रिरास�न" अर्था��तवा�दी�गीण क�हे#, खसरा�न$बारा 225 राकबा� 0.089 हे�०भू�मि�अधिधुया�क"ठा�रा बालभूद्रप्रस�दीशु�क्ल�क�वा�रिरास�न" अर्था��तवा�दी�गीणक�हे# खसरा�न$बारा 397 राकबा� 0.202 हे�०भू�मि�बाड़ा�क"ठा�रा�, 1/3 �, प्रकितवा�दी�क्र��$क 06 �न�षशु�क्ल�एवा$ बा�क& शु�षकिहेस्स��, वा�दी�गीणक�हेकएवा$ किहेस्स� हे# इस�प्रक�राखसरा�न$बारा 607/1 राकबा� 0.413 हे�०भू�मि�)�रा�न�बा�ड़ा� �, बालभूद्रप्रस�दीशु�क्ल�क�वा�रिरास�न" अर्था��तवा�दी�गीणक�हे# खसरा�$ न$बारा 531 राकबा�लगीभूगी 0.5340 हे�०भू�मि�क" शिशुवाप्रस�दीक�द्वा�रा� स�धुरा��क" किवाक्रयाकिकया�जो�चा�क�हे#, इसक�अल�वा�प्रकितवा�दी�क��$क 01 अकिनलक���राशु�क्ल�क�द्वा�रा�क"ट��रा"डीएवा$ दीतरा,गी�रा"डीक& भू�मि� लगीभूगी 7-8 एकड़ाभू�मि�क" किवाक्रयाकरादिदीया�हे#" जो&4�रसे#+&मिधा� �रन�)�ह��ह-।"
5
Sd/(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) JUDGE
Sumit
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the learned trial Court was justified in rejecting the plaintiffs' application to amend the prayer clause of the plaint for vagueness.
Whether the proposed clarificatory amendment can be incorporated in the prayer column or must be placed in the body of the plaint.
Whether the plaintiffs' writ petition under Article 227 challenging the impugned order can succeed.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Abhisek Shukla S/p Late Tulsikant Shukla
Shrikant Shukla
Nitin Shukla
Praveen Shukla
Anil Kumar Shukla
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector
Ravindra Kumar Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
