Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 17 (0.63 seconds)
Sri M Krishne Gowda vs Sri Raghu B Narayan on 20 August, 2025 cites

Kailash vs Nanhku & Ors on 6 April, 2005

In Kailash v. Nanhku [(2005) 4 SCC 480] this Court held: (SCC pp. 490-91, para 13) "13. At this point the question arises: when does the trial of an election petition commence or what is the meaning to be assigned to the word 'trial' in the context of an election petition? In a civil suit, the trial begins when issues are framed and the case is set down for recording of evidence. All the proceedings before that stage are treated as proceedings preliminary to trial or for making the case ready for trial. As held by this Court in several decided cases, this general rule is not applicable to the trial of election petitions as in the case of election petitions, all the proceedings commencing with the presentation of the election petition and up to the date of 1 (2009) 2 SCC 409
Supreme Court of India Cites 34 - Cited by 997 - R C Lahoti - Full Document

Ajendraprasadji N. Pande & Anr vs Swami Keshavprakeshdasji N. & Ors on 8 December, 2006

(Ajendraprasadji case [(2006) 12 SCC 1], SCC pp. 14-15, paras 41-43) "41. We have carefully considered the submissions made by the respective Senior Counsel appearing for the respective parties. We have also carefully perused the pleadings, annexures, various orders passed by the courts below, the High Court and of this Court. In the counter-affidavit filed by Respondent 1, various dates of hearing with reference to the proceedings taken before the Court has been elaborately spelt out which in our opinion, would show that the appellant is precluded by the proviso to rule in question from seeking relief by asking for amendment of his pleadings.
Supreme Court of India Cites 21 - Cited by 299 - A R Lakshmanan - Full Document

Baldev Singh & Ors. Etc vs Manohar Singh & Anr. Etc on 3 August, 2006

16. Reliance, however, has been placed by Ms Suri on Baldev Singh v. Manohar Singh [(2006) 6 SCC 498] wherein it was opined: (SCC pp. 504-05, para 17) "17. Before we part with this order, we may also notice that proviso to Order 6 Rule 17 CPC provides that amendment of pleadings shall not be allowed when the trial of the suit has already commenced. For this reason, we have examined the records and find that, in fact, the trial has not yet commenced. It appears from the records that the parties have yet to file their documentary evidence in the suit. From the record, it also appears that the suit was not on the verge of conclusion as found by the High Court and the trial court. That apart, commencement of trial as used in proviso to Order 6 Rule 17 in the Code of Civil Procedure must be understood in the limited sense as meaning the final hearing of the suit, examination of witnesses, filing of documents and addressing of arguments. As noted hereinbefore, parties are yet to file their documents, we do not find any reason to reject the application for amendment of the written statement in view of proviso to Order 6 Rule 17 CPC which confers wide power and unfettered discretion on the court to allow an amendment of the written statement at any stage of the proceedings."
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 542 - Full Document
1   2 Next