Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from a banking transaction involving Andhra Bank and ABN Amro Bank N.V., where the latter sought recovery of Rs.15,66,66,591/- for failure to deliver certain bonds. The suit was initially filed in the High Court of Delhi and later transferred to the Special Court in Bombay under the Special Court (Trial of Offences relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992. Andhra Bank denied the allegations and sought to amend its written statement to include a defense based on the claim that the suit was not maintainable as it was filed in a personal capacity rather than on behalf of a disclosed principal. The Special Court rejected this amendment, citing delay as a reason. The Supreme Court, however, found that delay alone should not bar the amendment and that the court should not assess the merits of the amendment at this stage. The court allowed the amendment and directed the appellant to file the amended written statement by a specified date. In a related appeal, the court also addressed the rejection of an affidavit intended to be tendered in evidence, ruling that it could not be dismissed solely for lacking admissions. The Supreme Court set aside the Special Court's orders in both appeals, allowing the amendments and the admission of the affidavit, while not delving into the merits of the case itself.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Amendment of Written Statement - Delay in Filing - Delay is not a valid ground for refusing amendment - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order VI, Rule 17 - The court held that delay in filing an application for amendment of the written statement should not prevent the amendment if it is necessary for the decision of the real controversy. The Special Court's rejection of the amendment was set aside. (Paras 5-7) B) Civil Procedure - Admissibility of Evidence - Rejection of Affidavit - Affidavit cannot be rejected solely for lack of admission - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order XVIII, Rule 4 - The court found that the Special Court acted illegally in rejecting the application to tender an affidavit in evidence, as the statements were relevant to the issues involved in the suit. (Paras 3-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Special Court erred in rejecting the application for amendment of the written statement and the admissibility of an affidavit in evidence.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the Special Court's order rejecting the amendment application, and directed the appellant to file the amended written statement by 12th July 2007. The court also set aside the order rejecting the affidavit in evidence, allowing it to be tendered.
Law Points
- Amendment of pleadings
- delay in amendment applications
- privity of contract
- admissibility of evidence
