<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2011 (1) TMI 1538 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277939</link>
    <description>A belated amendment to a counter-claim at the appellate stage may be refused even though amendment power is wide, because it remains subject to judicial discretion and must advance determination of the real controversy. Where issues have been framed, the trial has substantially progressed, and the proposed amendment would add a possession claim that reopens concluded stages, prolongs the suit, or unsettles rights already crystallised by decree, the amendment is not appropriate. The text states that the respondents&#039; proper course was to file an independent suit for possession, and the trial court&#039;s rejection of the counter-claim was therefore upheld in substance.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 31 Dec 2018 15:36:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=550289" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (1) TMI 1538 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277939</link>
      <description>A belated amendment to a counter-claim at the appellate stage may be refused even though amendment power is wide, because it remains subject to judicial discretion and must advance determination of the real controversy. Where issues have been framed, the trial has substantially progressed, and the proposed amendment would add a possession claim that reopens concluded stages, prolongs the suit, or unsettles rights already crystallised by decree, the amendment is not appropriate. The text states that the respondents&#039; proper course was to file an independent suit for possession, and the trial court&#039;s rejection of the counter-claim was therefore upheld in substance.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277939</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>