The Government has amended sections 2 and 14 of the Atomic Energy Act, 1962 through the Atomic Energy (Amendment) Bill, 2015, which would enable Nuclear Power Corporation of India (NPCIL) to form joint venture companies with other Indian PSUs to meet
"No nation founded upon injustice can stand. From the sand enshrouded Egypt, from the marble wilderness of Athens, from every fallen, crumbling s
Introduction When under a contract an employer entrusts works to a contractor to be carried out in a time bound manner by supplying specified mate
Introduction The parties entering into a contract usually reduce the agreed terms into writing for the record and affix their signatures to the doc
Posted by JAIME
Heard learned Counsel appearing for the
2. The above petition challenges an order passed by the learned
Judge framing additional issues, based on an application filed by the
petitioners. The learned Counsel for the petitioners has pointed out
that the learned Judge has erroneously considered that the petitioners
are claiming ownership in respect of the property bearing Survey
No.47/20, as well as Survey No. 47/20-A of Assonora Village. The
learned Counsel also points out that though the issue of cause of
action has been framed, nevertheless, there is no specific issue
framed as to whether respondents prove that the petitioners had
knowledge of the deed of partition.
3. I have considered the submissions of the learned Counsel and
with his assistance, I have gone through the impugned order, as well
as the application filed by the petitioners for framing additional
issues and the issues which were already framed by the learned
4. With regard to the first contention of the learned Counsel
appearing for the petitioners, on perusal of issue No.2, as framed by
the learned Judge, the fact that the original property is surveyed
under No.47/20, which was thereafter surveyed under No.47/20-A is
taken care of. In such circumstances, the contention of the learned
Counsel appearing for the petitioners that a specific issue has to be
framed in connection with the property surveyed under No.47/20-A,
would not survive.
5. With regard to the second contention of the learned Counsel
appearing for the petitioners, on perusal of the issues framed by the
learned Judge, I find that an issue of limitation has already been
framed. Consequently, the issue sought to be raised by the
petitioners would have to be established in the context of the findings
on such an issue.
6. In such circumstances, I find that there is no jurisdictional
error committed by the learned Judge which would call for
interference of this Court. The law provides that issues can be
framed and re-cast at any stage of the suit. As such, there is no
failure of justice to the petitioners in case this Court does not
interfere with the impugned order, at this stage.
7. Hence, the petition stands rejected.
The Plaintiffs filed Writ Petition against an impugned Order against the Trial Court for refusing to frame all issues, to frame proper issues and correct defective issues framed. The Petition was rejected by the High Court without properly examining the contents of the Writ Petition and by further stating that - The Law provides that Issues can be framed and recast at any stage of the suit and that the Court does not interfere with the impugned order at this stage. Does this mean that at the time of proving the issues framed by the court the Plaintiffs can raise objection against faulty issues and seek framing of all issues not framed? Or should the Plaintiffs move another application for framing of issues before the trial commences?
Updated on : 22/07/2018 09:08:09