Dismissed

Jeet Singh @ Surjit Singh v. Malkiat Singh and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC5 May 2015CR/2854/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This revision petition challenged the lower court's refusal to allow an amendment to the written statement. The High Court found no substantial contentions in the proposed amendment, no prejudice to the defendant, and thus dismissed the revision, holding no intervention was justified under Article 227.

What did the court decide?

Revision petition dismissed; order refusing amendment to written statement upheld.

Jeet Singh @ Surjit Singh Vs Malkiat… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Punjab & Haryana HC (2015)

¶1

C.R. No.2854 of 2015

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

C.R. No.2854 of 2015 Date of Decision.05.05.2015

¶5

Jeet Singh @ Surjit Singh

¶6

.......Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

Malkiat Singh and another

¶9

......Respondents

¶10

Present: Mr. Swaran Tiwana, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN

¶12

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?

¶13

To be referred to the Reporters or not ?

¶14

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶15

¶16

K. KANNAN J. (ORAL)

¶17

The application for amendment in the written statement was filed after the defendant engaged another counsel and he sought to bring elaborate contentions through the amended written statement. I have seen the original written statement and the amendment sought to be brought and I find there is nothing substantial brought through the subsequent written statement. If there was something substantial, the Court could have allowed the amendment and if it has chosen not to do so, it was doing it on the basis of the amended provisions of the Civil Procedure Code that will disable a person from bringing amendment after commencement of the trial unless the fact brought through the amendment was such as that could not be brought out in spite of exercise of due diligence. If the Court below has declined to entertain such an application, I will find no need for modifying the same. I find

¶18

that no prejudice was caused to the defendant by denial of amendment PANKAJ KUMAR 2015.05.07 14:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶19

-2-

¶20

C.R. No.2854 of 2015

¶21

and there is no justification for an intervention by exercise of

¶22

extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution.

¶23

The revision petition is dismissed.

¶24

(K. KANNAN) JUDGE

¶25

May 05, 2015 Pankaj*

¶26

PANKAJ KUMAR 2015.05.07 14:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Jeet Singh @ Surjit Singh v. Malkiat Singh and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jeet Singh @ Surjit Singh v. Malkiat Singh and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jatinder Chopra Vs Surinder Chopra @ Veena Kaushal @ Richa @ Surinder Kaur

Swaran Singh Vs Pyare Lal

Kulbhushan Vs Ram Kumar and Anr.

Rajender Kumar Vs Administrator HUDA & Ors.

Bhupinder Singh Vs Surender Kumar and Ors.

Bhogi Ram Vs Brahmanand Now Deceased Thr Lrs Yogesh and Ors.