RATANLAL Vs. MOHANLAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Parties through their counsel.

(2.) The petitioner before this Court has filed this present writ petition being aggrieved by the order dated 23/6/2018 passed by the appellate Court by which the application preferred by the petitioner for amendment under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been rejected.

(3.) Facts of the case reveal that during the pendency of the appeal, an application was preferred for amendment at the final hearing stage. In the amendment application in respect of a suit which was filed on 30/11/2011, in which a judgment was passed on 27/9/2017, it was stated by the plaintiff that the sale deed was not clear, whereas, facts of the case reveal that the sale deed was very much clear and all minute details of the sale deed were in existence and in those circumstances, as the amendment application was preferred almost after 6 years that too at the appellate stage, the appellate Court has dismissed the amendment application. Order passed by the appellate Court dated 23/6/2018 can never be said to be perverse, nor suffers from any jurisdictional error.