J&K&L HC: Matrimonial Remedies May Overlap, But Cruelty Claims Cannot be Selectively Invoked  ||  Delhi High Court: Customs Officials Acting Officially Cannot be Cross-Examined as of Right  ||  J&K&L HC: Second Arbitral Reference is Maintainable if Award is Set Aside Without Deciding Merits  ||  J&K&L HC: Gold Voluntarily Given to Customer is 'Entrustment'; Theft Excluded from Insurance Cover  ||  Delhi HC: Working Mothers Cannot be Forced to Bear Full Childcare Burden While Fathers Evade Duty  ||  J&K&L HC: Arbitral Tribunal Not a “Court”; Giving False Evidence Before it Doesn’t Attract S.195 CrPC  ||  Calcutta HC: Award May Be Set Aside if Tribunal Rewrites Contract or Ignores Key Clauses  ||  Delhi HC Suspends Kuldeep Singh Sengar’s Life Term, Holding Section 5(C) of POCSO Not Made Out  ||  Calcutta High Court: Arbitration Clause in an Expired Lease Cannot be Invoked For a Fresh Lease  ||  Delhi High Court: 120-Day Timeline under Section 132B Of Income Tax Act is Not Mandatory    

Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Kharagpur v. Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) and Ors. - (High Court of Delhi) (07 Aug 2015)

Pleadings allowed to be amended when 'petition ripe for hearing'

MANU/DE/2230/2015

Civil

The Court allowed an amendment of pleadings requiring a determination of jurisdiction by the court. The Court questioned whether the amendment was necessary for the determination of the dispute or if it added a new issue for adjudication. It concluded that there could not be any impediment in the determination of territorial jurisdiction as a preliminary issue.

Relevant : Revajeetu Builders and Developers vs. Narayanaswamy and Sons and Ors. MANU/SC/1724/2009 Vidyabai and Ors. vs. Padmalatha and Anr. MANU/SC/8401/2008 Kusum Ingots and Alloys Ltd. vs. Union of India (UOI) and Anr. MANU/SC/0430/2004

Tags : AMENDING PLEADING   TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved