SANJAY BADONI vs PRADEEP CHOPRA Advocate - PIYUSH GARG — WPMS/1050/2024

Case under Under Article 227 of the Constituion of India Section 227. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 25th March 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: UKHC010058552024

Filing Number

WPMS/2680/2024

Filing Date

23-Apr-2024

Registration No

WPMS/1050/2024

Registration Date

23-Apr-2024

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish Naithani

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish Naithani

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

MISC WRIT PETITION ( 2 )

Sub-Category

AGAINST THE ORDER OF PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY RENT CONTROL ( 2 )

Judicial Branch

ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)

Decision Date

25-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 16-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Under Article 227 of the Constituion of India Section 227

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SANJAY BADONI

    Adv. SIDDHARTHA SINGH,D S NEGI,D S NEGI, ,KSHITIJ SAH,D S NEGI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.PRADEEP CHOPRA Advocate - PIYUSH GARG

  2. 2.SMT MEENA CHOPRA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 25-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish NaithaniView PDF

    Summary The High Court of Uttarakhand allowed the writ petition and set aside the Revisional Court's order rejecting the tenant's amendment application to his written statement. The court held that the Revisional Court impermissibly examined the merits of the defence instead of applying settled liberal principles governing amendments to written statements under CPC Order VI Rule 17. Since the proposed amendment was clarificatory and alternative in nature, necessary for complete adjudication, and caused no irreparable prejudice, the amendment application was allowed, and the revision proceedings were remanded for continuation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 05-Jan-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish NaithaniView PDF

  4. 22-Dec-2025

    Admission Matters -25

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish Naithani

  5. 10-Dec-2025

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish NaithaniView PDF

  6. 10-Dec-2025

    Admission Matters -25

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish Naithani

  7. 25-Nov-2025

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish NaithaniView PDF

  8. 24-Nov-2025

    Admission Matters -25

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish Naithani

  9. 21-Nov-2025

    Admission Matters -25

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish Naithani

  10. 17-Nov-2025

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish NaithaniView PDF

  11. 13-Nov-2025

    Admission Matters -25

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish Naithani

  12. 08-Oct-2025

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish NaithaniView PDF

  13. 15-Sep-2025

    Admission Matters -25

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish Naithani

  14. 14-Aug-2025

    Admission Matters -25

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari

  15. 27-Dec-2024

    Admission Matters -25

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari

  16. 29-Nov-2024

    Admission Matters -25

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Purohit

  17. 26-Sep-2024

    Admission Matters -25

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Purohit

  18. 13-Sep-2024

    Admission Matters -35

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Bharti Sharma

  19. 07-Jun-2024

    Admission Matters -35

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Bharti Sharma

  20. 24-May-2024

    Fresh Cases For Admission -3

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Bharti Sharma

  21. 24-Apr-2024

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Bharti SharmaView PDF

  22. 24-Apr-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  23. 23-Apr-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPMS/1050/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The High Court of Uttarakhand allowed the writ petition and set aside the Revisional Court's order rejecting the tenant's amendment application to his written statement. The court held that the Revisional Court impermissibly examined the merits of the defence instead of applying settled liberal principles governing amendments to written statements under CPC Order VI Rule 17. Since the proposed amendment was clarificatory and alternative in nature, necessary for complete adjudication, and caused no irreparable prejudice, the amendment application was allowed, and the revision proceedings were remanded for continuation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case