Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.29 seconds)
Documents citing Kum Meenakshi vs Smt H Nagarathnamma on 21 July, 2023

Sri Anjine Gowda vs Sri G N Annegowda on 2 February, 2024

Meenakshi Vs. Smt. Nagarthanamma, 2) Civil Appeal No.5909/2022. I have perused them with due respect. They support the application averments. Because it is held that amendment can be allowed as it would curtail multiplicity of proceedings. It is also held that basic principles ought to be taken into consideration while allowing are rejecting the amendment application.
Karnataka High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - S R Kumar - Full Document

Sri Jagadeesh @ Jagannath vs Sri Shanmukahappa on 12 January, 2026

18. The above ratio of the Hon'ble Apex Court has been followed by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka and also by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Meenakshi's case and Dinesh Goyal 's case (supra), upon which the learned counsel for the plaintiffs relied upon. In view of said ratio, it is very well settled that, the amendments which are necessary for determining the real question in controversy, which avoids the multiplicity of proceedings, which does not result in injustice to the other side which does not intending to withdraw any admissions and does not intending to raise time barred claim, shall be allowed as a general rule. In the case on hand, as already observed by this
Karnataka High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - S R Kumar - Full Document
1