Delhi HC: Workman Cannot Claim Section 17(B) of the ID Act Wages after Reaching Superannuation Age  ||  Allahabad HC: Caste by Birth Remains Unchanged Despite Conversion or Inter-Caste Marriage  ||  Delhi High Court: Tweeting Corruption Allegations Against Employer Can Constitute Misconduct  ||  Delhi High Court: State Gratuity Authorities Lack Jurisdiction over Multi-State Establishments  ||  Kerala High Court: Arrest Grounds Need Not Mention Contraband Quantity When No Seizure is Made  ||  SC: Silence During Investigation Does Not Ipso Facto Mean Non-Cooperation to Deny Bail  ||  Supreme Court: High Courts Cannot Re-Examine Answer Keys Even in Judicial Service Exams  ||  SC: Central Government Employees under CCS Rules are Not Covered by the Payment of Gratuity Act  ||  Supreme Court Holds CrPC Principles on Discharge and Framing of Charges Continue under BNSS  ||  Supreme Court: High Courts Must Independently Assess SC/ST Act Charges in Section 14A Appeals    

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