Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, original defendant No.5 in a suit for specific performance of agreements dated 19/4/1992 and 20/11/1992 concerning lands bearing Survey Nos.141/1 and 141/3, challenged the order dated 20th December 2010 passed by the learned IInd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Thane, allowing the plaintiff's application for amendment (Exhibit 83). The suit was filed by respondent No.1 against the petitioner and respondents 2 to 5. The petitioner had an agreement in its favour from defendant No.1 (respondent No.2) dated 9/7/1997, pursuant to which possession was handed over. The plaintiff had earlier amended the plaint in 1998, incorporating paragraph 15A regarding the display of a signboard of 'SASA' at the suit property. The impugned amendment sought to incorporate subsequent events, including the fact that the petitioner had put up a signboard of 'SASA' and was using the property, and sought additional reliefs. The petitioner contended that the amendment would change the nature of the suit and cause prejudice. The court held that amendments to bring on record subsequent events are necessary for effective adjudication and do not change the nature of the suit if they arise from the same cause of action. The defendant can be compensated by costs and can file an additional written statement. The writ petition was dismissed, and the trial court's order was upheld.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Amendment of Pleadings - Order VI Rule 17 CPC - Subsequent Events - The court considered whether an amendment incorporating subsequent events and additional reliefs should be allowed. Held that amendments to bring on record subsequent events are necessary for effective adjudication and do not change the nature of the suit if they arise from the same cause of action. The trial court's order allowing amendment was upheld. (Paras 1-10) B) Civil Procedure - Amendment of Pleadings - Prejudice - Order VI Rule 17 CPC - The court examined whether the amendment would cause prejudice to the defendant. Held that the defendant can be compensated by costs and the amendment does not cause irreparable prejudice as the defendant can file additional written statement. (Paras 8-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court erred in allowing the amendment application under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which sought to incorporate subsequent events and additional reliefs, and whether such amendment would change the nature of the suit or cause prejudice to the defendant.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. The order dated 20th December 2010 passed by the learned IInd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Thane, allowing the amendment application, is upheld. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Amendment of pleadings
- Order VI Rule 17 CPC
- subsequent events
- change in nature of suit
- prejudice to opposite party
