Writ petition challenging rejection of an Order 6 Rule 17 CPC application to amend a written-statement in a specific performance suit. The court held the delayed amendment sought to change the main defence and was not bona fide, found no jurisdictional error or perversity in the order below, and dismissed the petition.
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.
[2025:RJ-JP:41708]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15669/2025
Netram Son of Buddhiram, aged about 52 Years, Resident of Binega, Tahsil-Hindon, District-Karauli, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dileep Singh Jadaun For Respondent(s) : Ms. Parveshika Singh on behalf of Mr. V.D. Gathala (AGC)
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order
13/10/2025
[2025:RJ-JP:41708]
[CW-15669/2025]
(2 of 2)
on 22.06.2021, wherein the defendant No.1-petitioner filed his written-statement on 31.08.2021 and the petitioner has taken a defence that the alleged sale agreement is forged and fabricated.
(MANEESH SHARMA),J
SOURAV /18
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the court below rightly refused amendment of the written-statement under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC after a delay of three and a half years.
Whether an amendment that alters the main defence in the written-statement can be permitted.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Netram
Narendra Singh Meena
Dan Singh Meena
Sub-Registrar Shirmahaveerji, District Karauli
Nayab Tahsildar, Shrimahaveerji, District-Karauli
Maneesh Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
