TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court allows amendment of written statement in agreement interpretation case. Admissions can be explained.</h1> <h3>AKSHAYA RESTAURANT Versus P. ANJANAPPA</h3> The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision to allow the amendment of the written statement in a case involving the interpretation of an agreement ... - Issues involved: Interpretation of agreement of sale, application for amendment of written statement, validity of amendment granted by High Court.Interpretation of agreement of sale: The respondents, as owners of the land, entered into an agreement with the appellants for the sale of the property. The respondents claimed that the possession was not delivered to the plaintiff as per the agreement, leading to the cancellation of the agreement by the defendant. The respondents were in peaceful possession of the property, and the revenue records were in their name. The trial court dismissed the petition to amend the written statement, stating that it was not open to the respondents to explain the nature of the agreement. However, the High Court allowed the amendment, stating that even admissions can be explained, and inconsistent pleas can be taken in pleadings. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, emphasizing that there was no material irregularity in permitting the amendment under Section 115 CPC.Application for amendment of written statement: The respondents filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 seeking to amend the written statement to clarify that the agreement was not for sale but for the development of the land for mutual benefit. The trial court initially dismissed the application, but the High Court allowed the proposed amendments. The appellants argued that the respondents should not be allowed to withdraw their admission of entering into an agreement of sale. However, the Supreme Court held that the High Court was justified in permitting the amendment, as even admissions can be explained, and modifications to pleadings can be made during the course of the proceedings.Validity of amendment granted by High Court: The High Court's decision to allow the amendment of the written statement was upheld by the Supreme Court. The Court emphasized that parties are allowed to explain terms and conditions of agreements during the evidence stage of the proceedings. The appeal was dismissed, and no costs were awarded, as the terms of the agreement were to be examined during the trial.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
