Brij Mohan Gupta Vs Anil Kumar

High Court Of Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh 13 Oct 2006 (2007) 146 PLR 819 : (2007) 1 RCR(Civil) 692
Bench: Single Bench
Result Published
Acts Referenced

Judgement Snapshot

Hon'ble Bench

Vinod K.Sharma, J

Final Decision

Dismissed

Acts Referred

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 6 Rule 17

Judgement Text

Translate:

Vinod K. Sharma, J.@mdashPresent revision petition has been filed against the order dated 27.5.2006 passed by the learned Trial Court allowing

the amendment of the petition by the respondent herein.

2. By way of amendment the respondent herein sought elucidation and elaboration of the facts which were already pleaded. Learned court below

came to the conclusion that the ground of personal necessity has already been pleaded and the amendment sought was only in the nature of

clarification and elaboration of facts already pleaded. It was also held that by way of amendment no new ground and fresh cause of action has

been pleaded. Therefore, the learned court below allowed the amendment subject to payment of Rs. 1,000/- as costs.

3. The only contention raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioner before the court below was that in view of the amendment in Order 6 Rule

17 of the CPC (for short the Code) no amendment could be allowed after the commencement of trial. However, the learned court below has

rightly held that said amendment was not applicable to the present case as the pleadings in his case was filed prior to the amendment of Order 6

Rule 17 of the Code.

4. No prejudice has been caused to the petitioner by way of present amendment which may call for any interference by this court in revisional

jurisdiction.

5. Dismissed.

From The Blog
Supreme Court Reviews Forest Rights Act Protecting Livelihoods
Oct
24
2025

Story

Supreme Court Reviews Forest Rights Act Protecting Livelihoods
Read More
Patna HC: Promotions Valid Only from Actual or DPC Date
Oct
24
2025

Story

Patna HC: Promotions Valid Only from Actual or DPC Date
Read More