LAKHAN LAL DHRITEWSH vs KOMAL DAS DHRITEWSH Advocate - Raj Kumar Sahu, ,MANISH KUMAR SALUJA — WP227/288/2026

Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 04th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010095962026

Filing Number

WP227/5476/2026

Filing Date

07-Mar-2026

Registration No

WP227/288/2026

Registration Date

10-Mar-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

ORDINARY CIVIL MATTERS ( 17 )

Sub-Category

OTHERS AND MIXED BAG ONES.. ( 1750 )

Judicial Branch

Writ Section

Decision Date

04-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 05-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.LAKHAN LAL DHRITEWSH

    Adv. PRAVEEN KUMAR SHARMA,Aman Upadhyay,Aman Upadhyay, ,SUSHIL DUBEY,Aman Upadhyay

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.KOMAL DAS DHRITEWSH Advocate - Raj Kumar Sahu, ,MANISH KUMAR SALUJA

  2. 2.Seema Ghritesh

  3. 3.Aditya Ghritesh

  4. 4.Pranjal Ghritesh

  5. 5.Anita Ghritesh

  6. 6.Akriti Ghritesh

  7. 7.Mayank Ghritesh

  8. 8.Laxmin Ghritesh

  9. 9.Urmila Ghritesh

  10. 10.Satrughan Lal Ghritesh

  11. 11.Rewaram Ghritesh

  12. 12.Praveen Singh Thakur

  13. 13.T.K. Vishwash

  14. 14.Keshav Prasad Gupta

  15. 15.State of Chhattisgarh

    Adv. A.G.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 04-May-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar AgrawalView PDF

    Summary of WP227/288/2026 The High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed the writ petition and set aside the trial court's order rejecting the defendant's amendment application. Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal held that the defendant should be permitted to amend his written statement to deny his signature on a family settlement deed dated 02.05.2022, as the proposed amendment does not change the nature of the suit or defence—it merely contests the authenticity of one document. Though filed with delay (22.08.2025, nearly two years after the deed was filed), the court permitted the amendment since plaintiff's evidence remained pending and the substantive burden of proof remained on both parties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 12-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh RajputView PDF

  4. 12-Mar-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput

  5. 07-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP227/288/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of WP227/288/2026 The High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed the writ petition and set aside the trial court's order rejecting the defendant's amendment application. Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal held that the defendant should be permitted to amend his written statement to deny his signature on a family settlement deed dated 02.05.2022, as the proposed amendment does not change the nature of the suit or defence—it merely contests the authenticity of one document. Though filed with delay (22.08.2025, nearly two years after the deed was filed), the court permitted the amendment since plaintiff's evidence remained pending and the substantive burden of proof remained on both parties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case