advocatemmmohan

My photo

ADVOCATEMMMOHAN -  Practicing both IN CIVIL, CRIMINAL AND FAMILY LAWS,Etc.,

WELCOME TO LEGAL WORLD

WELCOME TO MY LEGAL WORLD - FOR KNOWLEDGE IN LAW & FOR LEGAL OPINIONS - SHARE THIS

Thursday, March 28, 2013

No amendment is necessary - it can be lead in evidence = once the petitioner has asserted that she is the lawful owner of the said property, it is for the petitioner to establish her ownership over the said property whether by way of registered settlement deed or sale or gift or by succession, and by all means, she can establish her ownership. Merely because she has not stated in the plaint that she became owner by virtue of the release deed, it can not be said that the petitioner would be precluded from leading evidence. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the application filed by the petitioner seeking to amend the plaint stating that she became the owner by virtue of the registered release deed is immaterial as she is always free to lead evidence to establish her ownership over the suit schedule property.




THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH

C.R.P.No.155 of 2013

ORAL ORDER:
          This Revision is filed  by the petitioner aggrieved by the  order made in I.A.No.843 of 2012 in O.S.No.4163 of 2010 dated 21.11.2012 on the file of  III Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, whereunder the application filed under Order VI Rule 7 of CPC to amend the plaint was dismissed.
           The petitioner is the plaintiff, who filed suit O.S.No.4163 of 2010 against the respondent-defendant for recovery of mesne profits based on the title over the suit schedule property.  After filing the suit, the petitioner filed the present I.A. seeking to amend the plaint by incorporating the following:
      “That the plaintiff became the owner of the suit schedule property by virtue of registered release deed vide document No.2246 of 1992 and she has been regularly paying property tax and electricity charges”.

After considering the matter, the trial Court dismissed the said I.A. by impugned order.  Questioning the same, the present C.R.P. is filed.

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned order and other material available on record, I am of the view that 
once the petitioner has asserted that she is the lawful owner of the said property, it is for the petitioner to establish her ownership over the said property whether by way of registered settlement deed or sale or gift or by succession, and by all means, she can establish her ownership.  Merely because she has not stated in the plaint  that she became owner by virtue of the release deed, it can not be said that the petitioner would be precluded from leading evidence.

Therefore, I am of the opinion that the application filed by the petitioner seeking to amend the plaint stating that she became the owner by virtue of the registered release deed is immaterial as she is always free to lead evidence to establish her ownership over the suit schedule property.
Subject to the above observation, the revision is dismissed at the stage of admission.  As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, stands dismissed.  There shall be no order as to costs.     
      

                                                           ________________
                                                            V. ESWARAIAH, J

Date: 24.1.2013
DA/VVR
                      

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH















C.R.P.No.155 of 2013





24.1.2013





IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT HYDERABAD


THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH

C.R.P.No.155 of 2013


Date: 24.1.2013

Between:

Smt.Ayesha Rizwana                                                .. Petitioner
And


Mushtaq Ahmed
.. Respondent















No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.