MOHAN LAL versus ANANDBAI & ORS.

Pleas regarding fraudulent nature and antedating of the gift deed should not be allowed to be raised by amendment, as such pleas were not part of the original pleadings, issues, or evidence, constitute a new cause of action, and would be time-barred, making it unfair to the respondents.

Parties: Appellant: Mohan Lal; Respondents: Anandibai & Ors.
Jurisdiction: India
Judgment Date: 03 March 1971
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Judgment and Decree Dated August 14, 1964 of the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench
Outcome: Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics: Amendment of Pleadings, Plea Not Raised in Pleadings, Res Judicata, Fraudulent Deed, Antedating

Practice and Procedure Amendment of Pleadings Plea Not Raised in Pleadings Res Judicata Fraudulent Deed Antedating

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2

Parties

Mohan Lal

Appellant

Anandibai & Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Judgment and Decree Dated August 14, 1964 of the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench

Legal Issues

1 Whether a plea not raised in pleadings, issues, or evidence can be allowed to be raised in arguments
2 If amendments should be permitted to include pleas of fraud and antedating at a late stage
3 Interpretation of permission to amend by High Court

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

Appeal dismissed with costs.
No amendment to written statement in respect of fraud or antedating allowed at this stage.