Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ashok vs Kailashchandra Deceased Through Lrs. ... on 1 May, 2024
Author: Anil Verma
Bench: Anil Verma
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
ON THE 1 st OF MAY, 2024
MISC. PETITION No. 2219 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
ASHOK S/O KRISHNAVALLABH DUBEY, AGED ABOUT 73
YEAR S, OCCUPATION: NOTHING 119/24 NAI SADAK,
SHAJAPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI ZENITH CHHABLANI - ADVOCATE)
AND
1A. KAILASHCHANDRA DECEASED THROUGH LRS.
GOPALKUNWAR W/O KAILASHCHANDRA, AGED
ABOUT 78 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
AGRICULTURIST, R/O NAI SADAK, OPP. RADHA
TALKIES, SHAJAPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
1B. KAILASHCHANDRA DECEASED THROUGH LRS.
ANJANA W/O VINAY BHARADWAJ, AGED ABOUT
52 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE, R/O 12,
FRIENDS COLONY, ALWAR, RAJASTHAN
(RAJASTHAN)
1C. KAILASHCHANDRA DECEASED THROUGH LRS.
GITIKA W/O AJAY DUBEY, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE, R/O AJAY
AUTOMOBILES, RAJGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)
1D. KAILASHCHANDRA DECEASED THROUGH LRS.
VATSAL S/O AJAY DUBEY, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: NOT KNOWN, ADDRESS: AJAY
AUTOMOBILES, RAJGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. CHANDRAKANTA BAI W/O HARIOM PUROHIT,
AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NOT
KNOWN GOPAL BHAWAN, GOPAL BAGH COLONY,
JHABUA (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. MANJUBAI W/O VISHVRAJ PUROHIT, AGED
ABOUT 72 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NOT KNOWN 19,
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TEJPRAKASH
VYAS
Signing time: 01-05-2024
18:42:54
2
SENIOR M.I.G. VIKRAM NAGAR, OFFICERS
COLONY, RATLAM (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. HEMKANTA W/O KRISHNAVALLABH DUBEY
5. HEMKUWARBAI W/O KRISHNAVALLABH DUBEY
6. MANORMADEVI W/O RAMESH NIGAM, AGED
ABOUT 70 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NOT KNOWN,
R/O NEAR RAHUL TRADERS, NAI SADAK,
SHAJAPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
7. VIDHYABAI W/O DINESH JOSHI, AGED ABOUT 68
YEARS, OCCUPATION: NOT KNOWN , R/O NEAR
RAHUL TRADERS, NAI SADAK, SHAJAPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
8. ABHAY KUMAR S/O KAILASHCHANDRA DUBEY,
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NOT
KNOWN, R/O 75, SANJANA PARK, BICHOLI
MARDANA, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
9A. ANIL KUMAR S/O KAILASHCHANDRA DUBEY
DECEASED THROUGH LRS ALKA W/O ANIL
DUBEY, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
NOT KNOWN, R/O KAILASH WARE HOUSE,
BARWAL GHATI, A.B. ROAD, SHAJAPUR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
9B. ANIL KUMAR S/O KAILASHCHANDRA DUBEY
DECEASED THROUGH LRS CHAITANYA S/O ANIL
DUBEY, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
NOT KNOWN, R/O KAILASH WARE HOUSE,
BARWAL GHATI, A.B. ROAD, SHAJAPUR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
9C. ANIL KUMAR S/O KAILASHCHANDRA DUBEY
DECEASED THROUGH LRS VASHISTH S/O ANIL
DUBEY, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
NOT KNOWN, R/O KAILASH WARE HOUSE,
BARWAL GHATI, A.B. ROAD, SHAJAPUR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
10. MADHYA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
CORPORATION, THROUGH MANAGER, MADHYA
PRADESH STATE TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
SHAJAPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
11A. BRIJVALLABH S/O RADHAVALLABH DECEASED
THROUGH LRS HEMLATA W/O BRAJVALLABH,
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TEJPRAKASH
VYAS
Signing time: 01-05-2024
18:42:54
3
AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NOT
KNOWN, R/O BHATT MOHOLLA, NAI SADAK,
SHAJAPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
11B. BRIJVALLABH S/O RADHAVALLABH DECEASED
THROUGH LRS PRADEEP S/O BRAJVALLABH
DUBEY, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
NOT KNOWN, R/O 15, A.B.C. RAJSHREE PALACE
COLONY, PIPLIHANA, INDORE (MADHYA
PRADESH)
11C. BRIJVALLABH S/O RADHAVALLABH DECEASED
THROUGH LRS SUNIL S/O BRAJVALLABH DUBEY,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NOT
KNOWN, R/O DHOBI CHORAHA, OPP. LIC OFFICE,
SHAJAPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
11D. BRIJVALLABH S/O RADHAVALLABH DECEASED
THROUGH LRS SANDEEP S/O BRAJVALLABH
DUBEY, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS , R/O OPP.
PANCHRATNA TOWER, A.B. ROAD, SHAJAPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
11E. BRIJVALLABH S/O RADHAVALLABH DECEASED
THROUGH LRS DEEPAK S/O BRAJVALLABH
DUBEY, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS , R/O BHATT
MOHOLLA, OPP. RADHA TAKIZ, SHAJAPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
11F. BRIJVALLABH S/O RADHAVALLABH DECEASED
THROUGH LRS SHEELA W/O PRAKASH PUROHIT,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NOT
KNOWN, R/O 75-A, VEENA NAGAR, OPP. BOMBAY
HOSPITAL, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
11G. BRIJVALLABH S/O RADHAVALLABH DECEASED
THROUGH LRS INDIRA W/O TEJPRAKASH
SHARMA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
NOT KNOWN, R/O F1, NEAR COMMUNITY HALL,
RISHI NAGAR, UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
11H. BRIJVALLABH S/O RADHAVALLABH DECEASED
THROUGH LRS ASHA W/O VIRENDRA PUROHIT,
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NOT
KNOWN, R/O NEW SARASWATI COLONY,
BADNAWAR, DISTRICT DHAR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TEJPRAKASH
VYAS
Signing time: 01-05-2024
18:42:54
4
This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner on admission.
2. The petitioner has preferred this petition under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 01/04/2024
passed in RCS/A/10013/1999 by Principal District and Sessions Judge,
Shajapur, whereby an application filed under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC has
been dismissed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the proposed
amendments are necessary for proper adjudication of the matter. Earlier suit
was dismissed without touching the merits of the case only on the basis of non-
inclusion of all the properties and without framing any issue on this point. The
trial Court has ignored all these material facts. It is settled principle of law that a
plaint can be amended at any stage. Hence, he prays that impugned order be set
aside.
4. In support of his contention, he placed reliance upon the judgment
delivered by the apex Court in the case of Ganesh Prasad Vs. Rajeshwar
Prasad an Ors. passed in Civil Appeal No.1699 of 2023 on 14/03/2023.
5. From perusal of the amendment application and the impugned order, it
appears that earlier matter had travelled up to the High Court and vide order
dated 12/07/2023 passed in First Appeal No.333/2001 matter was remanded
back to the trial Court for framing of the issue as regards the maintainability of
the suit for non-inclusion of all the joint family properties of the parties and
thereafter, to decide the same in accordance with law.
6. The trial Court has provided sufficient opportunity to the petitioner to
amend his plaint. Proposed amendments were filed at belated stage that too
without assigning any valid reason for it. From the proposed amendment, the
nature of the suit will be changed. Nothing has been mentioned by the petitioner
that as to why he did not produce the amendment at the earlier stage.
7. In view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that the
impugned order passed by the trial Court is just and proper and no illegality or
perversity is found in the impugned order. Hence, no case for interference by
this Court is made out.
8. Accordingly, the miscellaneous petition being sans merit is hereby
dismissed.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ANIL VERMA)
JUDGE
Tej
