In this civil writ jurisdiction case, the Patna High Court disposed of an application challenging a lower court's order rejecting an amendment petition under Order VI, rule 17 CPC. The High Court found no infirmity in the lower court's decision.
Application dismissed; no infirmity found in the impugned order.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5154 of 2012
======================================================
All are sons of late Ramdhari Rout. All are residents of VillageBarwa, P.S.- Govindganj, T.O.P.—Areraj, District- East Champaran at Motihari. .... .... Respondents 2nd Set. ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha For the Respondent/s : Mr.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER
The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 19.5.2009 passed by the learned Sub-Judge-I, East Champaran at Motihari in Title (Partition) Suit No.365 of 2001, whereby the learned court below has been pleased to reject amendment prayed by the defendant-petitioners under Order VI, rule 17 of
the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking amendment in the written
Patna High Court CWJC No.5154 of 2012 (4) dt.19-10-2012
2
statement.
Perusal of the amendment manifests that the amendment petition having filed on 3.5.2005 the defendants moved the same for hearing on 19.5.2009, i.e. after lapse of four years and it is in this background that the learned court below has rejected the prayer. No infirmity can be found in the order passed by the learned court below.
This application is accordingly disposed of.
(Jyoti Saran, J)
SKPathak/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the rejection of an amendment petition under Order VI, rule 17 CPC filed after a delay of four years is liable to be set aside on writ jurisdiction.
Whether the lower court was empowered to reject the petition for amendment due to the lapse of time.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Kamal Kishore Prasad and others
Lalita Devi and others
Jyoti Saran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
