A Relief For Which No Prayer Or Pleading Was Made Should Not Be Granted
Case: Akella Lalita vs Sri Konda Hanumantha Rao
Coram: Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Krishna Murari
Case No.: CA 6325-6326 OF 2015
Court Observation: “It is settled law that relief not found on pleadings should not be granted. If a Court considers or grants a relief for which no prayer or pleading was made depriving the respondent of an opportunity to oppose or resist such relief, it would lead to miscarriage of justice.” In this case while directing for change of surname of the child, the High Court has traversed beyond pleadings and such directions are liable to be set aside on this ground.. Before parting with this subject, to obviate any uncertainty it is reiterated that the mother being the only natural guardian of the child has the right to decide the surname of the child. She also has the right to give the child in adoption. The Court may have the power to intervene but only when a prayer specific to that effect is made and such prayer must be centered on the premise that child’s interest is the primary consideration and it outweighs all other considerations. With the above observations the directions of the High Court so far as the surname of the child is concerned are set aside.
Previous Posts
Commercial Courts (Amendment) Act, 2018 Cannot Be Applied Retrospectively: Delhi High Court
