Case Note & Summary
The appellants, original defendants in a civil suit, filed an appeal challenging two orders passed by the Civil Judge Senior Division, Gangakhed: (1) order dated 26.06.2014 rejecting their application (Exh.45) for amendment of the written statement, and (2) order dated 13.12.2019 rejecting their application (Exh.89) for adjournment. The suit was filed by the respondents for specific performance of contract. The appellants sought to amend the written statement to incorporate additional facts, but the trial court rejected it on the ground that the application was filed after the commencement of trial and the appellants failed to show due diligence. The adjournment application was rejected as the court found no sufficient cause. The High Court, in appeal, held that the trial court's orders were discretionary and no interference was warranted. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Amendment of Pleadings - Order VI Rule 17 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Due Diligence - The court held that the amendment application was filed after the commencement of trial and the appellants failed to show due diligence, hence the rejection was proper (Paras 4-5).
B) Civil Procedure - Adjournment - Order XVII Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Discretion - The court held that the trial court's refusal to grant adjournment was a discretionary order and no interference was warranted in appeal (Para 6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court erred in rejecting the application for amendment of the written statement (Exh.45) and the application for adjournment (Exh.89) in a civil suit.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Amendment of pleadings
- Adjournment
- Discretionary power
- Due diligence
- Order VI Rule 17 CPC
- Order XVII Rule 1 CPC
- Interference in appeal
Case Details
2022 LawText (BOM) (12) 22
Appeal from Order No.2 of 2022
Mr. Mahesh P. Kale for Appellants, Mr. S. S. Gangahedkar for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3, 10
Ramrao s/o Rangnathrao Jadhav and Balasaheb s/o Kishanrao Jadhav
Laxman s/o Rangnath Jadhav and others
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil appeal challenging orders rejecting amendment of written statement and adjournment in a suit for specific performance of contract.
Remedy Sought
Appellants sought to set aside the orders dated 26.06.2014 and 13.12.2019 and allow the amendment and adjournment applications.
Filing Reason
The trial court rejected the appellants' application for amendment of written statement (Exh.45) and application for adjournment (Exh.89).
Previous Decisions
The trial court passed orders on 26.06.2014 rejecting Exh.45 and on 13.12.2019 rejecting Exh.89.
Issues
Whether the trial court erred in rejecting the amendment application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC?
Whether the trial court erred in rejecting the adjournment application under Order XVII Rule 1 CPC?
Submissions/Arguments
Appellants argued that the amendment was necessary for proper adjudication and the adjournment was sought due to unavoidable circumstances.
Respondents opposed the amendment as belated and the adjournment as lacking sufficient cause.
Ratio Decidendi
The trial court's orders rejecting amendment and adjournment were discretionary and based on due diligence and sufficient cause; no interference is warranted in appeal.
Judgment Excerpts
This Appeal from Order challenges the orders dated 26.06.2014 and 13.12.2019 passed below Exhs. 45 and 89 by the Civil Judge Senior Division, Gangakhed.
The trial court has considered the aspect of due diligence and has rejected the application for amendment.
The order passed by the trial court is a discretionary order and no interference is called for.
Procedural History
The appellants filed an appeal against two orders of the Civil Judge Senior Division, Gangakhed: one dated 26.06.2014 rejecting amendment application (Exh.45) and another dated 13.12.2019 rejecting adjournment application (Exh.89). The High Court heard the appeal and dismissed it on 13.12.2022.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order VI Rule 17, Order XVII Rule 1
