| Case ID |
0508d37f-b200-41a3-a816-32a842cf4fdf |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Revision Petition No. 224 of 1951 |
| Decision Date |
Feb 13, 1952 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Lahore High Court allowed the amendment of the plaint under Order VI, rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code, emphasizing that full powers of amendment must be enjoyed and should always be liberally exercised. The court outlined that although the matters sought to be amended became controversial after the written statement was filed, they were not new matters and were raised in the original pleadings. The decision also clarified that the original context of the suit remained unchanged despite the amendments, and thus the plaintiffs were entitled to seek a declaration of ownership, including the properties Chak Allahabad and Ash-Shams, as reversionary interests. The court dismissed the petition but permitted modifications to the amended plaint, ensuring that the relief sought aligned with the legal principles governing the case. |
| Summary |
In the case of Malkani BRAG BHARI vs. Malik FATEH MUHAMMAD and others, the Lahore High Court ruled on a civil revision petition concerning the amendment of a plaint under the Civil Procedure Code. The court considered the implications of allowing amendments that could change the subject matter of the suit. The ruling emphasized the importance of allowing full powers of amendment to ensure the proper administration of justice. The decision allowed for the inclusion of properties in the claim, affirming the rights of the plaintiffs as per the customary law and the will of the deceased. The case highlights the balance between procedural rules and the substantive rights of parties in civil litigation, particularly in the context of succession and property rights. This ruling is essential for understanding the application of Order VI, rule 17 in civil procedure and its impact on the management of disputes regarding property ownership and inheritance. |
| Court |
Lahore High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
M. R. KAYANI, J
|
| Lawyers |
B. Z. Kaikaus,
Yaqub Ali,
Akhlaq Hussain
|
| Petitioners |
Malkani BRAG BHARI
|
| Respondents |
others,
Malik FATEH MUHAMMAD
|
| Citations |
1952 SLD 139,
1952 PLD 237
|
| Other Citations |
Ma Shwe Mya v. Maung Mo Hnaung, A I R 1922 P C 249,
M. Kanda v. Waghu, A I R 1950 P C 68,
M. Doraiswami Iyengar v. G. Radhakrishna Chetty, A I R 1938 Mad. 669,
Wadhawa Singh and others v. Partab Singh and others, A I R 1928 Lah. 933,
Nur Fazal v. Bibi Bani and others, A I R 1930 Lah. 278 (2),
V. T Elaya Pillai v. Ramaswami Jadaya Goundan, A I R (34) 1947 Mad. 165,
Ghulam Muhammad and others v. Mehta Chandras Dat, A I R 1927 Lah. 771,
Hardial Singh and others v. Sardarni Jaswant Kaur, A I R (30) 1943 Lah. 159,
Shibram Kairi v. Md. Masadar Ali and others, A I R (34) 1947 Cal. 17,
Divi Seshacharyulu v. Divi Lakshminarayana Charyulu and others, A I R (33) 1946 Mad. 105,
Ibramsa Rowther v. Muhammad Esuf Rowther, A I R 1930 Mad. 322,
L. A. Subramania Iyer v. R. H. Hitchcock, A I. R 1925 Mad. 950
|
| Laws Involved |
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
|
| Sections |
O. VI, r. 17
|