High Court allowed a belated application to amend a plaint and exhibit sale deeds in a title suit, dismissing objections regarding delay and directing expeditious disposal.
The application dated 11.09.2017 is allowed to mark sale deeds and amend the plaint; respondents given liberty to rebut.
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 MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.181 of 2018
======================================================
Bindeshwari Mandal Son of Late Arjuna Mandal, Resident of VillageRampur, P.S.- Kahalgaon, District- Bhagalpur.
4.1. Najo Devi Wife of Late Garib Mandal Resident of Village- Rampur, P.S.Kahalgaon, District- Bhagalpur.
4.2. Sunil Mandal S/o Late Garib Mandal Resident of Village- Rampur, P.S.Kahalgaon, District- Bhagalpur.
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.181 of 2018(18) dt.11-09-2023 2/3
... ... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gajendra Kumar Jha, Advocate Mr. Sushil Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Abinash Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER
18 11-09-2023
Heard the submission of the learned counsel for the
petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.
The present application is directed against the order dated 10.10.2017 passed by Munsif, Kahalgaon in T.S. No. 59 of 2010 by which the application dated 11.09.2017 filed by the petitioner to mark three registered sale deed as evidence and also to amend the two numerical figures and four names in the plaint have been rejected.
The rejection is on the ground that it has been filed after delay. The application has been rejected in the year 2017 whereas the sale deed was filed in the year 2014.
Sri Avinash Kumar has opposed the prayer of the petitioner and has submitted that the impugned order is legal and cannot be interfered with.
In my opinion, the sale deed can be exhibited and the application dated 11.09.2017 as mentioned above can be allowed in the interest of justice.
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.181 of 2018(18) dt.11-09-2023 3/3
The application dated 11.09.2017 is allowed with liberty to the respondents to rebut the same in accordance with law.
Title Suit is directed to be decided expeditiously preferably within a period of one year from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
The Court below will proceed ex parte against the non-cooperating party and will not grant any unnecessary adjournment.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Guddu/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to allow a belated application to amend plaint and exhibit sale deed in a title suit.
Whether the impugned order rejecting the application due to delay should be interfered with.
Bindeshwari Mandal
Vijay Mandal
Pawan Mandal
Vijendra Mandal
Najo Devi
Sunil Mandal
Sandeep Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
