Your World of Legal Intelligence
 India | 1-800-335-6202

MA No. 2957 of 2017. Case: Kamla Kant Singh and Another Vs Indrasan Singh and Another. High Court of Allahabad (India)

Judgment Cited in Precedent Map Related
Vincent
Case NumberMA No. 2957 of 2017
CounselFor Appellant: J.P. Singh, Adv.
JudgesManoj Misra, J.
IssueCivil Procedure Code
Judgement DateMay 09, 2017
CourtHigh Court of Allahabad (India)

Judgment:

Manoj Misra, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record.

The present petition has been filed challenging the orders dated 07.02.2017 and 18.04.2017 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Fast Track Court, Azamgarh and District Judge, Azamgarh respectively.

By the impugned order dated 07.02.2017, the trial court has allowed an amendment in the plaint by which the boundaries mentioned in the plaint of the suit property has been amended.

Admittedly, the trial has not yet commenced therefore the amendment was not hit by the proviso to Rule 17 of Order 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has assailed the amendment on the ground that the amendment application was malafide because interim injunction was obtained in the suit proceeding and to make the injunction operative on a larger area, deliberately the boundaries were got amended by way of amendment therefore such an amendment should not have been permitted. In support of the above submission, decisions of the apex court in Revajeetu Builders and Developers v. Narayanaswamy and Sons and Others: (2009) 10 SCC 84 and Ramesh Kumar Agarwal v. Rajmala Exports P. Ltd. and others: 2012 (116) RD 774 have been...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT