In a recent legal case, the court analyzed and upheld the dismissal of applications for summoning records and amendment of the plaint. The decision was based on the lack of merit and protracting litigation tactics by the appellants. The court’s reasoning, confirmed by higher authorities, emphasizes the importance of proper pleading in a case and the consequences of filing belated applications. Stay informed on the legal intricacies of the case with our detailed summary.
Facts
- The appellants filed an application (No. 97-C) to summon the record regarding the leaves of Ramesh Chander Singh from Rajput Regiment Centre Fatehgarh, who is the father of the first respondent and second defendant in the suit.
- The appellants questioned the adoption deed executed by late Sudama Singh in favor of defendant no.1, registered before Sub-Registrar, Jakhaniya, District Gazipur.
- Another similar application was filed in Application No.109-C which was dismissed by the Trial Court on 10.05.2013.
- The civil appeals are filed by the plaintiffs in Original Suit No. 107/2010 in Saidpur, Gazipur, against the orders dated 12.07.2013 in Writ Petitions (Civil) Nos. 37415/2013 and 37416 of 2013.
- Writ petition in W.P.(C) No 37415/2013 was directed against the order dated 22.02.2013 on Application No. 97-C in O.S. No 107/2010.
- Writ petition in W.P.(C) No 37416/2013 was filed against the order dated 10.05.2013 on Application No. 109-C in the same suit.
- The plaintiffs carried the matter by way of revision petitions before the District Court, which ended in dismissal, leading to the filing of writ petitions before the High Court in W.P.(C) Nos. 37415/2013 and 37416/2013, which were also dismissed.
- An application was filed in Application No. 97-C to summon the 2001 leave records of defendant No.2 Ramesh Chander Singh from Rajput Regiment Centre Fatehgarh on the grounds that he was not present during the adoption ceremony.
- The said application was opposed by filing objections by the respondents.
- Trial Court dismissed the application due to lack of pleading in the plaint.
- The application was also dismissed because it was filed at a belated stage.
- The order of dismissal was dated 22.02.2013.
Also Read: Transfer of Writ Petitions for Chartered Accountants’ Tax Audit Guidelines
Analysis
- The application filed belatedly was rightly dismissed by the Trial Court and confirmed by the Revisional Court and High Court due to the ceremony being mentioned in the adoption deed from 14.11.2001.
- The plaintiffs claimed the adoption was false as necessary formalities were not followed.
- The registered adoption deed, which mentioned the adoption ceremony on 14.11.2001, was challenged in the suit.
- No specific plea was raised in the suit questioning the adoption on 14.11.2001, hence the belated application to summon records was not justified.
- It is a well-settled principle that evidence cannot compensate for the absence of pleading in a case.
- The appellants’ application to summon records related to Ramesh Chander Singh’s duty on 14.11.2001 was filed at a belated stage after the closure of evidence in the suit.
- The appellants filed an application for summoning the record in Application No.97-C, which was dismissed by the Trial Court.
- They filed a similar application again in Application No.109-C for the same relief, which was also rightly rejected by the Trial Court.
- Subsequent to the dismissal of the application in Application No.97-C, for summoning the leave/service record of defendant No.2, the appellants filed an application for amendment of the plaint in Application No.103-A.
- The application for amendment of the plaint was dismissed by the Trial Court
- The order of dismissal of the application for amendment of the plaint was confirmed by the District Judge, Gazipur in Civil Revision No.58 of 2013 on 03.05.2013.
Also Read: Analyzing Interference with Acquittal in Legal Conviction Case
Decision
- The reasons recorded in the orders passed by the Trial Court, confirmed by the Revisional Court and High Court are valid.
- The appellants were found to be protracting the litigation despite directions from the High Court for expeditious disposal of the suit.
- The appeals are dismissed for lack of merit, with no order as to costs.
- The said order has become final.
Also Read: Judicial Review on Sentence and Compensation in Criminal Case
Case Title: BIRAJI @ BRIJRAJI Vs. SURYA PRATAP AND ORS (2020 INSC 626)
Case Number: C.A. No.-004883-004884 / 2017
