LASSA LONE Vs. MOHD SUBHAN MIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Civil Revision petition pertains to the year 1984 and has been directed against the order passed by Munsiff, Ganderbal in a Civil Suit titled Muhammad Subhan Mir versus Some Nath and others for setting aside the same.

(2.) RESPONDENT No.1, plaintiff, appears to have instituted an suit for pre -emetion and possession on 29th August, 1981 against the petitioner and respondents 2 and 3 in the Court of Munsiff, Ganderbal. Plaint in the aforesaid suit was not signed by any person, nor was it verified by the plaintiff or by any other person. Petitioner took an objection in his defense regarding the maintainability of the suit on this count. The plaintiff, apprehending the dismissal of his suit on this defect, moved an application for amendment.

(3.) I have given my thoughtful consideration to the points involved. Order 6 Rules 14 and 15 CPC deal with the pleadings. According to Rule 14, it is mandatory that every pleading shall be signed by a party and his pleader, if any, provided that a party pleading is by reason of absence or for other good cause, unable to sign the pleading, it may be signed by any person duly authorized by him to sign the same or to sue or defend on his behalf. Similarly, Rule 15 makes it abundantly clear that every pleading shall be verified at the foot by the party or by one of the parties pleading or by some other person proved to the satisfaction of the Court to be acquainted with the facts of the case. Herein in this case admittedly the pleading was neither signed, nor verified. That is why the plea has been raised that this is no plaint at all in the eye of law, so the application for amendment could not have been entertained.