In a revision petition against the dismissal of an amendment application in a money recovery suit, the High Court held that introducing a new plea regarding lack of bank account was factually unsupported and reopening the trial was unjustified. The revision was dismissed.
Revision petition dismissed with no alteration of 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.
CR No. 1128 of 2013
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH
CR No. 1128 of 2013 Date of decision March 7, 2013
Capt. Gurdev Singh Khaira s/o Mohan Singh
....... Petitioner
Versus
Mukhtiar Singh s/o Bhagat Singh
........ Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN
Present:None.
K. Kannan, J (oral).
an application for amendment of the written statement filed at the Appellate Court. In a suit for recovery, the contention was that the defendant had no connection whatsoever with the plaintiff and the documents relied on by the plaintiff are not genuine. At the trial of the suit it appears that there had been an application for comparing the signatures by the handwriting expert and finger print expert. The trial Court had already declined the prayer. The impugned order also reveals that the defendant had applied for summoning of witness which was also declined. The issue of whether the defendant had appropriate opportunity to bring his witness and whether he could have been granted an opportunity to have the documents sent for
CR No. 1128 of 2013
2
appraisal by handwriting/finger print expert will be matters that will avail for consideration in the appeal in the manner provided under Section 105 CPC.
3. The revision petition is dismissed.
(K. KANNAN) JUDGE
March 7, 2013 archana
3 issues framed by the court
Whether new amendments to pleadings can be entertained during appellate proceedings without reopening the trial.
Whether the lower court correctly declined the application for amendment of the written statement.
Whether the revision petition seeking interference with the impugned order should be allowed.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Capt. Gurdev Singh Khaira
Mukhtiar Singh
K. Kannan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
