Sheshbhan Singh Gond (Dead) Smt. ... vs Puttu Gond (Dead) Durgawati Singh Gond
2025 Latest Caselaw 115 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Sheshbhan Singh Gond (Dead) Smt. ... vs Puttu Gond (Dead) Durgawati Singh Gond on 1 April, 2025

Author: Dwarka Dhish Bansal

Bench: Dwarka Dhish Bansal

          NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:15748




                                                                1                              MP-1807-2020
                            IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT JABALPUR
                                                      BEFORE
                                    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DWARKA DHISH BANSAL
                                                    ON THE 1 st OF APRIL, 2025
                                                MISC. PETITION No. 1807 of 2020
                           SHESHBHAN SINGH GOND (DEAD) SMT. TERASIYA BAI AND
                                                OTHERS
                                                 Versus
                          PUTTU GOND (DEAD) DURGAWATI SINGH GOND AND OTHERS
                         Appearance:
                            Ms. Renu Agrawal - Advocate for the petitioners.
                            None for the respondents though served and represented.

                            Smt. Vinita Sharma - P.L. for the State.

                                                                    ORDER

This misc. petition has been preferred by the original petitioner/plaintiff-Sheshbhan Singh Gond (now dead, through LRs), challenging the order dated 18.02.2020 passed by 2nd Civil Judge Class-II, Budhar, District Shahdol, in civil suit no.11A/2012 whereby trial Court has dismissed plaintiff's application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that although in first

round the suit filed by the petitioner was dismissed by trial Court, but upon filing civil appeal, first appellate Court upon consideration of an application under Order XLI Rule 27 CPC, set aside the judgment and decree dated 28.04.2015 passed by trial Court and matter was remanded to decide the civil suit afresh after taking into consideration the additional documents/evidence and after giving opportunity of adducing evidence to the parties and the

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:15748

2 MP-1807-2020 proposed amendment is necessary for deciding real controversy involved in the matter. She further submits that proposed amendment is necessary, otherwise the trial Court shall not permit the petitioners to lead evidence in that respect. She also submits that in any case, trial Court may be directed to permit the petitioners to adduce evidence in respect of the proposed pleadings. With these submissions, she prays for allowing the misc. petition.

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record.

4. Perusal of pleas taken in the plaint as well as the proposed pleadings shows that the plaintiff by way of proposed amendment wants to incorporate the pleadings which are in fact related to evidence and are not required to be pleaded.

5. As such, declining interference in the impugned order, it is directed

that the petitioners shall be permitted to adduce evidence in respect of the proposed pleadings and shall not be restrained to adduce evidence for want of pleadings.

6. With the aforesaid, this misc. petition is disposed off.

7. Misc. application(s), pending if any, shall stand closed.

(DWARKA DHISH BANSAL) JUDGE

pb