State Of Rajasthan And Anr. vs Mohammed Ikbal And Ors. on 4 March, 1998
In Ajanta Enterprises Jaipur v. Bimla Charan Chatterjee (supra), this Court while examining the scope of Order 8 Rule 9 CPC indicated thus :
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.41 seconds)Ramesh Kumar vs Chandu Lal & Anr on 14 January, 2009
26. Similarly in the matter of State of Rajasthan Vs. Mohd.
Iqbal [1998DNJ(Raj.),275] while considering the various
judgments of different High Courts including the judgment of this
Court in M/s. Ajanta Enterprises Vs. Bimla Charan Chatterjee and
Anr. [1987(1)RLR 991] this Court held that the plaintiff cannot
be allowed to introduce new pleas under the garb of filing
rejoinder, so as to alter the basis of his plaint. In rejoinder,
19
plaintiff has a right to explain only the additional facts
incorporated by the defendant in his written statement. In
rejoinder, plaintiff cannot be permitted to come forward with an
entirely new case or raise inconsistent pleas so as to alter his
original cause of action.
Shri. Ranjit Ch. Momin vs . State Of Meghalaya & Ors. on 11 March, 2021
21. As regard the contents in the rejoinder affidavit filed by the
Petitioner, Mr. Bhattacharjee has submitted that the Petitioner cannot come
forward with an entirely new case in the rejoinder and the original plea cannot
be permitted to be altered under the garb of filing a rejoinder. The case of
Gurjant Singh v. Krishan Chander & Ors: (2000) SCC Online Raj 237 at
paragraphs 9 & 10 and the case of Ajanta Enterprises v. Bimla Charan
Chatterjee & Anr: (1987) (2) WLN 172 at paragraph 8 was cited in this
regard.
Surendra Mehta vs Bapu Lal And Anr. on 17 December, 2007
A bare perusal of Sub-section (3) Of Section 21 of the Act 2001 goes to show that the Rent Tribunal or the Appellate Tribunal may not be bound by the procedure laid down by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 but, they are bound to adopt the procedure in conformity with the principle of natural justice. It is to be noticed that such provision requiring observance of principle of natural justice by the judicial bodies and quasi judicial authorities are generally not found incorporated in statutes specifically. In my considered opinion, while providing that the Rent Tribunal and Appellate Tribunal shall not be bound by procedure laid down by Civil Procedure Code, 1908, the legislature has consciously and purposely incorporated the said provision that proceeding before the Tribunal shall be guided by the principle of natural justice obviously, for the reason that observance thereof is considered to be assurance of justice and fairness. It is fundamental principle of natural justice that defence of a party to the proceedings before all courts, judicial bodies and quasi judicial authorities must always be fairly heard.
Gurjant Singh vs Krishan Chander And Others on 27 March, 2000
In State of Rajasthan vs. Mohammed Ikbal (6), this Court considered its earlier judgments in M/s. Ajanta Enterprises (supra) and M/s. Gannon Dunkerley & Co. Ltd. vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd. (7), and held that the plaintiff cannot be allowed to introduce new pleas under the garb of filing rejoinder, so as to alter the basis of his plaint. In rejoinder, plaintiff has a right to explain only the additional facts incorporated by the defendant in his written statement. In rejoinder, plaintiff cannot be permitted to come forward with an entirely new case or raise inconsistent pleas so as to alter his original cause of action.
1