Challenge made in this writ petition preferred under Article 227 of the constitution of India to the order passed by the Civil Court (S.D), Morbi in Special civil suit no. 102 of 2011 below application exh. 117 whereby the request of the plaintiff petitioner of amending the plaint under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been denied.
On hearing the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner and on examination of the material on record, there does not appear to be any error committed by the trial court in disallowing the application exh. 117.
The Court noted that the relief asked for is ex-facie barred by law of limitation as the petitioner has lost the right which was available prior to 11th August 1988 and after lapse of 35 years, such request has been made.
Court further noted that such relief is barred by the proviso to Section 34 of the specific Relief Act. Relying on various judgments of the Apex Court, as also on examining the facts on record, the court rejected such a request.
No error much less any grave miscarriage of justice could be pointed out while challenging the order impugned. The Court has followed the law of the land in denying the request which is ex-facie barred by limitation. Relevant would be to refer the judgment of the Apex Court at this juncture rendered in case of Ashutosh Chaturvedi Vs. Prano Devi and Paravi Devi & ors. reported in (2008) 15 SCC 610, where in it approved denial of amendment solely on the ground of pure question of limitation.
Petition deserves no meritorious consideration and accordingly it stands dismissed in limine.
(Ms.
Sonia Gokani,J.) Deepak* Top