Law:

Section:

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-­ ---- 0 - VI, R. 17 & S. 115 --- Amendment of pleadings to introduce new ca Application for amendments of written statement was dismissed by Court --- Ground for rejection of said application was that proposed amend of written statement would be contradictory to the defence already take Validity --- Courts although should be liberal in permitting amendments pleadings which were necessary for determining rear matters in controversy, same must be bona fide and defence already set up could not be allowed t totally substituted nor could its nature be changed --- Proposed amendment so to be introduced was that plaintiffs had procured transfer of land in question from Authority through fraud and misrepresentation --- Such amendment allowed would amount to setting up a new case and would run counter original written statement in which defendant's case was that he was no occupation of specific property belonging to plaintiffs but was occupying a of another property owner by a different person --- Defendant, thus, could raise new plea of fraud and misrepresentation for the first time by seek amendment of written statement Defendant could not challenge transfer Authority in favour of plaintiffs which was essentially a matter between plaintiffs and Authority '-- Defendant s father in an earlier suit filed against had admitted that he was not in occupation of land owned by person claim ownership thereof, but was in occupation of land owned by plaintiff Defendant being son and sucecssor-in-interest of his father could not set up of that other person in his proposed written statement whose ownership denied in earlier suit by his own father in which plaintiffs were also party as defendants --- Defendants' plea that facts now being introduced were not within his knowledge was belied by defendant himself when he appeared as a witness in the case --- Defendant, thus, was not entitled to seek amendment of written statement with a view to change and substitute a new cause of action Mt. Kanta Devi v. Sm. Kalawati and others AIR 1946 Lah. 419; The Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay v. Lala Pancham and others AIR 1965 SC 1008; Mst.…

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