Cpc G. Surya Narayanan Mhc Advt: ORDER VI RULE 17 – 2009(8)SCJ 712

[12/28, 14:03] Cpc G. Surya Narayanan Mhc Advt: ORDER VI RULE 17 –
2009(8)SCJ 712

P.A. JAYALAKSHMI VS. H. SHARADHA AND OTHERS

Court must bear in mind statutory limitations brought in by the Proviso when the Court should be liberal in allowing application for amendment of pleadings.

ORDER VI RULE 17 –
2009(8) SCJ 401

REVAJEETU BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS VS. NARAYANASWAMY AND SONS AND OTHERS

Courts have very discretion in allowing amendment of pleadings – Court should see whether such amendment is necessary for determination of real question in controversy – if other side can be compensated by cost, there is no injustice or prejudice.
[12/29, 10:23] Cpc G. Surya Narayanan Mhc Advt: ORDER XIV RULE 1 –
2009(8) SCJ 202

GANGAI VINAYAGAR TEMPLE AND OTHERS VS. MEENAKSHI AMMAL AND OTHERS

Court should ascertain the issue of disputed question on which parties are at variance and shall pronounce judgement on the issues framed.

ORDER XX RULE 18 –
2009(8)SCJ 281

SHUB KARAN BUBNA @ SHUB KARAN PRASAD BUBNA Vs. SITA SARAN BUBNA AND OTHERS

The Court in a partition suit has to refer the matter to collector or commissioner for a division after passing preliminary decree – this has to be performed in normal course as continuation to preliminary decree.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Call Now ButtonCALL ME