In a writ petition challenging the rejection of a prayer for amendment in the plaint, the Patna High Court, finding no sufficient grounds for interference, dismissed the petition as the trial court was found to have reasoned that the amendment could not have been prayed for earlier.
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.13431 of 2013
======================================================
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
.... .... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sushil Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. NATH ORAL ORDER
Patna High Court CWJC No.13431 of 2013 (3) dt.17-11-2016
2
after repeated calls. Learned counsel for the respondent nos. 6 and
7 is present.
From the perusal of the impugned order, it appears that prayer for amendment in the plaint has been rejected. It transpires that the suit was at the final stage where the argument was also about to conclude and at that stage the petition for amendment in the plaint was filed on behalf of the plaintiffs. It has been found by the learned court below that the written statement in the suit was filed on 19.12.2005 and on that basis the learned court below has disbelieved the case of the plaintiffs that the amendment as sought for could not have been prayer earlier.
After careful consideration of the matter, this Court does not find any reason to interfere in the impugned order. The application is, accordingly, dismissed.
(V. Nath, J)
Devendra/-
U
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the trial court's order rejecting the prayer for amendment in the plaint.
Dasarath Mistri
Vishwa Nath Prasad
V. Nath
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
