Skip to content


Mallikarjuna Vs. Pullaya and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectTenancy
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1893)ILR16Mad319
AppellantMallikarjuna
RespondentPullaya and ors.
Cases ReferredWeldon v. Neal L.R.
Excerpt:
civil procedure code - act xiv of 1882, section 53--amendment of plaint--substitution of legal representative for deceased defendant. - 1. it does not appear that leave to amend was asked for in the court of first instance before decree. we do not think that an amendment ought to be allowed on appeal, if by so doing the defendant is likely to be precluded from pleading limitation. weldon v. neal l.r. 19 q.b.d. 394.2. upon the facts stated, therefore, we are of opinion that the amendment asked for should be refused and the plaintiff left to his remedy by a regular suit.
Judgment:

1. It does not appear that leave to amend was asked for in the Court of First Instance before decree. We do not think that an amendment ought to be allowed on appeal, if by so doing the defendant is likely to be precluded from pleading limitation. Weldon v. Neal L.R. 19 Q.B.D. 394.

2. Upon the facts stated, therefore, we are of opinion that the amendment asked for should be refused and the plaintiff left to his remedy by a regular suit.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //