SC: Recoveries U/S 27 of Evidence Act Alone Cannot Sustain Conviction; 1988 Murder Acquittal Restored  ||  SC: Successive Impleadment Applications are Barred by Res Judicata under Different CPC Provisions  ||  Supreme Court Halts Coercive Measures in CJP Protest Cases, Directs Release of Minors  ||  Supreme Court: National Commission for Scheduled Castes Lacks Power to Pass Binding Orders  ||  Bombay HC: Alleged Illegal Arrest Alone Cannot Trigger Contempt Action Against Police  ||  Bombay HC Quashes Order against Taiwan National, Says Online Study Didn't Breach Visa Rules  ||  P&H High Court Issues Directions on LADC Scheme After Reviewing Lawyers' Objections  ||  Allahabad HC: Suspension of Sentence Plea Need Not Take Priority if Appeal is Ready  ||  Allahabad High Court: Surcharge Recovery From Pradhan Must Follow Panchayat Raj Act Procedure  ||  Allahabad HC Directs IB Probe into 4 Lucknow Lawyers, Raises Concern over Lawyer-Police Nexus    

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 2026 - All Rights Reserved