Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.37 seconds)The Companies Act, 1956
Section 22 in The Specific Relief Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Babu Lal vs Hazari Lal Klshori Lal & Ors on 29 January, 1982
7. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Babu Lal vs. Hazari Lal Kishori Lal
reported in (1982) 1 SCC 525 while explaining the meaning of word
'proceedings' employed in Section 22 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, which is
similar to Section 26 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, observed that
proceedings includes an execution proceedings.
Puran Ram vs Bhaguram & Anr on 29 February, 2008
In Puran Ram vs. Bhaguram and another reported in (2008) 4
SCC 102 while considering the scope of Section 26 of the Specific Relief Act,
1963, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that courts may allow the parties to amend
the pleading at any stage of the proceedings so as to include a relief for
rectification of the instrument. The relevant portion of the Hon'ble Apex Court
reads as follows:-
Raipur Manufacturing Co. Ltd. vs Joolaganti Venkatasubba Rao Veerasami ... on 22 March, 1921
15. So far as the submission of the learned counsel for
the respondent that the rectification of the agreement cannot be
permitted is concerned, we are of the view that Section 26(4) of
the Act only says that no relief for rectification of instrument
shall be granted unless it is specifically claimed. However,
proviso to Section 26, as noted herein earlier, makes it clear
that when such relief has not been claimed specifically, the
court shall at any stage of the proceeding allow such party to
amend the pleading as may be thought fit and proper to
include such claim. Therefore, we are not in agreement with the
learned counsel for the respondent that section 26 would stand
in the way of allowing the application for amendment of the
agreement. The views expressed by us find support in a
decision of the Madras High Court in Raipur Manufacturing
Co., Ltd Vs. Joolaganti Venkatasubba Rao Veerasamy & Co
[AIR 1921 Mad 664], wherein it was held that where in the
course of a suit for damages for breach of contract, the plaintiff
contends that there is a clerical error in the document
embodying the contract, it is not always necessary that a
separate suit should have been brought for rectification of the
document and it is open to the court in a proper case to allow
the plaintiff to amend the plaint and ask for the necessary
rectification.
1