The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision permitting the amendment, observing:

• The debarment orders stemmed from a continuous chain of events originating from the memo dated 08.03.2016.
• Continuous cause of action allows amendments without requiring a fresh suit or Section 80 notice.
• Limitation was tolled due to the continuous nature of the cause and COVID-19 relaxation.

High Court's view on continuous cause of action. (Para 9) Observations on limitation and continuous cause. (Para 21–23) Inapplicability of Section 80 notice. (Para 25–26) Conclusion dismissing the appeal. (Para 27)

Acts and Sections Discussed:

• Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC): Section 80 – Notice to Government; Order XXIII Rule 1 – Abandonment of Claim.
• Limitation Act, 1963: Computation of Limitation Period considering COVID-19 Relaxation.

Subjects:
Amendment of Pleadings, Continuous Cause of Action, Debarment Orders, High Court Decisions, Civil Suit, Limitation Period, Section 80 Notice, COVID-19 Relaxation.

Facts:

Nature of Litigation: Appeal against the High Court's order allowing amendment of plaint without Section 80 notice.

Parties and Remedy Sought: State of West Bengal challenged the amendment application filed by the Respondent in a civil suit regarding debarment orders.

Reason for Filing the Case: Respondent sought to include subsequent facts in the plaint to address continuous losses due to repeated wrongful debarments.

Relevant Laws in Question: Validity of plaint amendment without Section 80 notice; Limitation for challenging debarment orders.

Prior Decisions: The High Court kept the legality of the debarment orders open, allowing continuous cause of action.

Issues:

• Whether subsequent debarment orders constitute a continuous cause of action.
• Applicability of Section 80 notice for amendment applications.
• Limitation for challenging subsequent debarment orders.

Submissions/Arguments:
             a. Appellants:

• Amendments introduce a fresh cause of action; a new suit is required.
• Section 80 notice is mandatory for amendments introducing new claims.
• Amendments are time-barred under the Limitation Act.
  
  

 b. Respondents:

• Continuous cause of action justifies amendments in the existing suit.
• COVID-19 relaxation extends the limitation period.
• High Court's prior orders explicitly kept the issue open.

Ratio:

1. Continuous wrongful acts, like debarment orders arising from the same origin, form a continuous cause of action.
2. Section 80 notice is not applicable when amendments pertain to the same cause without altering the suit's nature or character.
3. Limitation for amendments involving continuous cause of action extends until the last act in the series.