Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, who were defendants in Special Civil Suit No.123 of 1990 filed by the predecessor of respondents No.1 to 8, challenged the order dated 2nd August 2001 rejecting their application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC for amendment of written statement and the order dated 19th January 2001 below Exh.134 passed by the C.J.S.D., Nandurbar. The suit was filed in 1990 for specific performance of contract and other reliefs. The petitioners filed their written statement in 1990 itself. After 11 years, in 2001, they filed an application seeking to amend the written statement to incorporate new facts regarding the nature of the transaction and the capacity of the plaintiff. The trial court rejected the application on the ground that the amendment was sought after commencement of trial and was not bonafide. The High Court upheld the trial court's order, holding that the amendment was sought at a belated stage, after the trial had commenced, and would cause prejudice to the respondents. The court observed that the petitioners failed to explain the delay and the amendment would change the entire nature of the defence. The civil revision application was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Amendment of Pleadings - Order 6 Rule 17 CPC - Bonafide Requirement - The court held that amendment sought after commencement of trial and after 11 years of filing of written statement, without sufficient cause, is not bonafide and would cause prejudice to the opposite party. (Paras 1-10) B) Civil Procedure - Amendment of Pleadings - Prejudice to Opposite Party - Order 6 Rule 17 CPC - The court held that allowing amendment at a belated stage would cause irreparable prejudice to the plaintiff as it would change the nature of defence and require fresh evidence. (Paras 8-10) C) Civil Procedure - Amendment of Pleadings - Delay and Laches - Order 6 Rule 17 CPC - The court held that delay of 11 years in seeking amendment, without any explanation, is fatal and the application is liable to be rejected. (Paras 7-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court was justified in rejecting the application for amendment of written statement filed after commencement of trial and after inordinate delay.
Final Decision
The civil revision application is dismissed. The order dated 2nd August 2001 rejecting the amendment application is upheld. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Amendment of pleadings
- Order 6 Rule 17 CPC
- Bonafide requirement
- Prejudice to opposite party
- Delay and laches
- Trial commencement
