In Brief
A widow sued her late husband's son to recover possession of property and arrears of damages. The defendant initially pleaded undue influence and claimed a family arrangement dividing the property. Thirteen years later, the defendant sought to amend his written statement to elaborate that the property was ancestral joint family property and claim coparcenary rights. The Trial Court allowed this amendment, but the High Court struck it down as lacking bona fides and untenable on merits. The Supreme Court held the High Court erred: supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 cannot evaluate case merits when reviewing amendment decisions. The amendment merely elaborated an existing defence and caused no prejudice, so the Trial Court's order was upheld."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.