Case Note & Summary
The case involves a writ petition filed by Ganpat Baburao Boraste challenging an order dated 13th February 2020 passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nasik, allowing an amendment application under Order VII Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) in Special Civil Suit No. 162/2012. The respondents (plaintiffs in the suit) had instituted the suit seeking a declaration that their title to the suit property (Gat No. 1075) had matured by adverse possession and that certain sale deeds executed by the defendants were not binding on them. The suit was filed nearly seven years after the dismissal of a previous suit (Regular Civil Suit No. 74/1994) filed by the plaintiffs' father, Pandurang Trambak Waghmare, which sought a declaration of exclusive ownership over the same property. The first suit was dismissed on 9th April 2010 and the decree was confirmed in second appeal by the Bombay High Court on 31st January 2018. The plaintiffs in the second suit are the sons of Pandurang. They filed an amendment application on 18th January 2018 (nearly seven years after instituting the suit) to amend the plaint. The trial court allowed the amendment. The petitioner, who is a defendant in the suit, challenged this order. The High Court, after hearing both sides, held that the amendment did not change the nature of the suit and was necessary for effective adjudication. The court noted that the amendment sought to incorporate additional facts regarding possession and denial of title, which were already part of the pleadings. The petition was dismissed, and the trial court was directed to expedite the hearing of the suit.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Amendment of Plaint - Order VII Rule 17 CPC - Delay in Amendment - The trial court allowed amendment of plaint after seven years of institution of suit seeking declaration of title by adverse possession. The High Court held that the amendment did not change the nature of the suit and was necessary for effective adjudication. The petition challenging the amendment was dismissed. (Paras 1-6) B) Property Law - Adverse Possession - Title by Adverse Possession - The plaintiffs sought declaration that their title to suit property had matured by adverse possession. The court considered the amendment which sought to incorporate additional facts regarding possession and denial of title. (Paras 2-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court was justified in allowing the amendment of the plaint under Order VII Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, nearly seven years after the institution of the suit, and whether such amendment changed the nature of the suit.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the trial court's order allowing the amendment. The court directed the trial court to expedite the hearing of the suit.
Law Points
- Amendment of plaint
- Order VII Rule 17 CPC
- Delay in amendment
- Change in nature of suit
- Adverse possession
- Title by adverse possession
