The High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking to quash an order allowing amendment of a plaint to include prayers for declaration and possession alongside permanent injunction.
Petition stands dismissed.
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 :
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE, 2019
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.105351/2015 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN
THE GRAM PANCHAYAT, RAMGURWADI TQ: KHANAPUR DIST: BELAGAVI BY ITS SECRETARY SHRI ANANT SHANKAR PATIL AGE: 54 YEARS,
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SANJAY S KATAGERI, ADV.)
AND
ANTON S/O JUJE LOBO AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O. HARSANWADI VILLAGE TQ: KHANAPUR DIST: BELAGAVI
... RESPONDENT
(RESPONDENT SERVED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 19-02-2015 ON I.A. NO.6 IN O.S.NO.27/2012 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KHANAPUR AS PER ANNEXURE-J HEREIN AND CONSEQUENTLY BY DISMISSING THE SAID I.A. NO.6 FILED UNDER ORDER 6, RULE 17 OF CPC BY THE RESPONDENT HEREIN.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
: 2 :
ORDER
Heard Shri Sanjay S. Katageri, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Perused the records.
: 3 :
defendant had forcibly with the assistance of the villagers had formed the road in suit property and this necessitated the plaintiff to seek for amendment of the plaint to incorporate additional pleadings at paragraphs 7, 8 and 10 for incorporating paragraphs 7a, 8a and 10a and in aid of said plea, prayer No.2a for declaration, mandatory injunction and possession has been sought for.
: 4 :
between the parties. Said finding does not suffer from any
lacuna calling for interference.
Hence, petition stands dismissed.
Sd/JUDGE
Rsh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the trial court's order allowing amendment of plaint under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Vidyabai and others vs. Padmalatha and anotherReferred¶20
_Vidyabai and others vs. Padmalatha and another_ reported in _AIR 2009 SC 1433_
Revajeetu Builders and Developers vs. Narayanswamy and sons and othersReferred¶24
_Revajeetu Builders and Developers vs. Narayanswamy and sons and others_ reported in _(2009) 10 SCC 84_ · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
THE GRAM PANCHAYAT, RAMGURWADI TQ: KHANAPUR DIST: BELAGAVI BY ITS SECRETARY SHRI ANANT SHANKAR PATIL
ANTON S/O JUJE LOBO
AARAVIND KUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
