Nimisha Pandey & Anor v Divya Bothra

Q: Which legislation does [2023] SGHC 332 consider?

The judgment refers to Land Titles Act (Cap 157). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

[2023] SGHC 332 High Court (General Division) 27 November 2023 HC/OC 138/2023 ( HC/RA 196/2023,HC/SUM 3265/2023,HC/RA 195/2023,HC/SUM 3266/2023 ) 24 min read

9 cases cited (7 SG, 2 foreign) Cited by 1 case

Key facts

Court	High Court (General Division)
Decided	27 November 2023
Judge	Goh Yihan
Charges / claim	Civil Procedure
Counsel	Clasis LLC, Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP, Foo Xian Fong, Koh Junxiang, Liew Min Yi Glenna, Ng Pi Wei, Prakash Pillai, Vikram Nair

Source: [2023] SGHC 332, High Court (General Division), decided 27 November 2023 — eLitigation. Updated 10 July 2026.

Catchwords

Civil Procedure — Amendments

Practice Areas

Civil Procedure

Judges (1)

Goh Yihan Delivered

Counsel (8)

Clasis LLC Firm Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP Firm Foo Xian Fong Counsel Defendant Koh Junxiang Counsel Plaintiff Liew Min Yi Glenna Counsel Defendant Ng Pi Wei Counsel Plaintiff Prakash Pillai Counsel Plaintiff Vikram Nair Counsel Defendant

Parties (3)

Deepak Mishra Plaintiff Divya Bothra Defendant Nimisha Pandey Plaintiff

Case Significance

Nimisha Pandey and another v Divya Bothra [2023] SGHC 332 is a decision of the General Division of the High Court delivered by Goh Yihan J on 27 November 2023. It arose alongside the defendant's Registrar's Appeal No 196 of 2023 against an Assistant Registrar's grant of summary judgment ordering her to pay the first claimant S$626,422 as the balance purchase price of a property. The defendant also applied in Summonses Nos 3265 and 3266 of 2023 to amend her defence and counterclaim and to adduce further evidence. Goh Yihan J allowed the amendment application in part but dismissed the application to adduce further evidence, and deferred the appeal to a date to be fixed. The judgment addresses civil procedure on amendments and has been cited 9 times.

[2023] SGHC 332 explained

Nimisha Pandey & Anor v Divya Bothra ([2023] SGHC 332) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (General Division) on 27 November 2023. It is categorised under Civil Procedure. Within this corpus it has since been cited by 1 other reported Singapore judgment, a measure of how often later decisions have referred to it. This page summarises what the reported decision covers and links the primary sources — the full judgment, the statutes it cites, and the other cases it engages with — so the decision can be read in context. It is reference information, not legal advice, and it does not state the outcome or any holding beyond what the official judgment records.

What is [2023] SGHC 332 about?

Nimisha Pandey & Anor v Divya Bothra ([2023] SGHC 332) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 2023. Its published catchwords are “Civil Procedure — Amendments”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.

Which legislation does [2023] SGHC 332 consider?

The judgment refers to Land Titles Act (Cap 157). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

What earlier Singapore cases does [2023] SGHC 332 cite?

Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2023] SGHC 216. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.

How influential is [2023] SGHC 332?

Within this corpus, [2023] SGHC 332 has been cited by 1 later reported Singapore judgment. That count reflects references from other decisions held in this corpus only and is a conservative lower bound on how often the case has actually been cited.

Summary

In a dispute over the balance purchase price of a property, the defendant Divya Bothra appealed against summary judgment ordering her to pay the first claimant S$626,422, and applied to amend her Defence and Counterclaim and to adduce further evidence. Goh Yihan J allowed the amendment application in part and dismissed the application to adduce further evidence, with costs of S$12,000 to the claimants. The hearing of the substantive appeal was deferred to a date to be fixed.

What did Goh Yihan J decide on the applications in Nimisha Pandey v Divya Bothra [2023] SGHC 332?

On 27 November 2023 Goh Yihan J allowed the defendant's amendment application (SUM 3265) in part but dismissed the application to adduce further evidence (SUM 3266), deferring the underlying appeal to a later date.

What sum was in dispute in Nimisha Pandey v Divya Bothra [2023] SGHC 332?

The Assistant Registrar had ordered Divya Bothra to pay the first claimant S$626,422, being the balance purchase price of a property, which was the subject of Registrar's Appeal No 196 of 2023 before Goh Yihan J.