AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
10 paragraphs · 172 wordsSanjay K. Agrawal, J
By the impugned order dated 04.08.2018 (Annexure - P/1), the petitioner / plaintiffs' application for framing additional issues under Order 14 Rule 5
of CPC has been rejected by the trial Court against which this writ petition has been preferred.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the additional issues framed are necessary for just and proper disposal of the suit and ought to have
been considered by the trial Court.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned order.
The trial Court has clearly held that the issues already framed would cover the additional issue proposed to be framed. Since the trial Court has
already held that the issues framed would cover the proposed issue to be framed therefore, the plaintiff will be allowed to lead evidence with regard to
the fact that the payment was not paid as per the sale deed.
With the aforesaid clarification, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to cost(s).