Case Details

CHANDRA KISHORE & OTHERS versus SPECIAL NYAYADHISH VASTU ADHINIYAM ACT & ORS.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement

Chandra Kishore & Others v. Special Nyayadhish Vastu Adhiniyam Act & Ors. - WRIT - C No. 62269 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 3254 (21 September 2005)

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

"Court No. 4"

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 62269 of 2005.

Chandra Kishore and others .............Petitioners.

Versus

Special Judge, E.C. Act

and others .........Respondents.

..............

Hon'ble Anjani Kumar, J.

By means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the order passed by the lower appellate Court dated 14th July, 2005, whereby during the pendency of appeal, the lower appellate Court has refused to permit the amendment in the pleading on the ground that the suit is of the year 1984 and remain pending up to the year 1994 and during ten years period of the pendency of the suit, the petitioners-plaintiffs have not taken any steps to amend the pleading as well as the appeal is also pending for 12 years, but this amendment application has been filed in the year 2005. After 22 years of the pendency of the litigation between the parties, this amendment application has been filed and there is absolutely no explanation given by the petitioners-plaintiffs in the application, the lower appellate Court therefore recorded a finding that the amendment application is sheer abuse of the process of the judicial proceedings. With the aforesaid observation, the lower appellate Court rejected the amendment application filed by the petitioners-plaintiffs, thus writ petition.

Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted before this Court that a perusal of Order VI, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure would demonstrate that there is no limitation prescribed and it is the discretion of the Court to permit the amendment at any stage of the proceedings and in this view of the matter, the lower appellate Court has committed an error in not permitting the petitioners to amend its pleadings. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the view taken by the lower appellate Court that the action of the petitioners-plaintiffs in filing the amendment application is sheer abuse of the judicial process is also incorrect and deserves to be quashed.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has not been able to demonstrate as to what is the explanation for not filing the application for amendment during 22 years of the pendency of the litigation. In this view of the matter, I do not see any error, much less manifest error of law in the order passed by the lower appellate Court, so as to warrant any interference by this Court in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

In view of what has been stated above, this writ petition has no force and is accordingly dismissed. However, there will be no order as to costs.

Dated: 21.09.2005.

Rks.

Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Case Details

Case Law Search

Judgement

Copyright

Advertisement