| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2017 SLG 1640 2017 SLD 1640 2017 PLD 23 |
Sindh High Court
High Court Appeals Nos. 178, 179 and 180 of 2016, decision Date : 20-09-2016, heard on: 16-08-2016
AQEEL AHMED ABBASI, JUSTICE, ABDUL MAALIK GADDI, JUSTICE
Amel Khan Kasi along with Ms. Nahl Chamdia for Appellants. Salahuddin Ahmed for
Respondents.
High Court Appeals Nos. 178, 179 and 180 of 2016, decision Date : 20-09-2016, heard on: 16-08-2016
AQEEL AHMED ABBASI, JUSTICE, ABDUL MAALIK GADDI, JUSTICE
Amel Khan Kasi along with Ms. Nahl Chamdia for Appellants. Salahuddin Ahmed for
Respondents.
KARACHI ELECTRIC SUPPLY CORPORATION
VS
MUHAMMAD SHAHNAWAZ AND OTHERS
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: 17
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)---.--- ---.----O. VI, R. 17---.---Pleadings---.---Amendment---.---Exercise of discretion by the Court under O. VI, R. 17, C.P.C.---.---Principles and scope---.---Period of limitation since the accrual of cause of action in a suit having expired---.---Effect---.---Court enjoyed jurisdiction under O.VI, R.17 of the C.P.C. to allow amendments in a plaint at any stage in the proceedings where, in the opinion of the court, the same was just and necessary for the final disposal of a case between the parties in accordance with law---.---Mere delay in making an application for amendment in pleadings was not a valid ground for refusing a proposed amendment in plaint, however, a court was also bound to exercise such discretion in accordance with settled judicial principles---.---Amendments were to be allowed if the same were necessary for accurate determination of a dispute between the parties and at any stage if the same did not change the complexion of the suit altogether or introduced a new cause of action and it did not cause prejudice to the other party---.---Amendments could also be allowed to seek consequential relief arising from a cause of action originally incorporated in the plaint or to add additional relief available to the plaintiff before the courts of higher jurisdiction, including the High Courts and the Supreme Court and could be allowed in order to base a plaint on a different title---.---Amendment to a plaint, however, cannot be allowed when mala fide on part of the plaintiff was explicitly visible in the pleadings or to raise a plea of fact which was derogatory to the plea already taken up in the plaint, particularly when such fact amounted to admission in favour of the other side---.---Amendment to a plaint could not be allowed on ground of findings made by another tribunal in respect of the same subject matter---.---Rights accrued in favour of one party could not be allowed to be snatched away by allowing amendment in a causal manner unless it qualified the test based on the established principles and the same cannot be done Mst. Ghulam Bibi and others v. Sarsa Khan and others PLD 1985 SC 345 ref. Mst. Ghulam Bibi…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492