Case Note & Summary
The plaintiff, M/s. R.K. Patel Engineers & Contractors Pvt. Ltd., filed a Chamber Summons in Suit No. 119 of 2001 seeking to amend the plaint. The plaintiff averred that after changing their advocate, the newly appointed advocate noticed that certain better particulars and documents necessary to determine the real controversy were not included in the plaint. The defendants opposed the application, contending that issues had already been framed and the amendment was intended to nullify their defence on jurisdiction and maintainability. The court, relying on the proviso to Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, held that it has wide power and unfettered discretion to allow amendment at any stage of proceedings, especially prior to trial. The main purpose of allowing amendment is to minimize litigation and decide the real controversy. The court cited the judgment in Parmeshwar s/o Dhondiba Umbre vs. Mahadeo s/o Waman Raut & Ors., 2012(1) Mh.L.J. 856, which held that amendments should be liberally allowed if they do not cause injustice to the other side. The court found that the amendment was necessary for the proper adjudication of the matter and allowed the Chamber Summons, directing the plaintiff to carry out the amendment within two weeks and the defendants to file an additional written statement within four weeks thereafter.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Amendment of Pleadings - Order VI Rule 17 CPC - Liberal Approach - The court has wide power and unfettered discretion to allow amendment at any stage, especially prior to trial, to decide the real question in controversy and minimize litigation. The amendment sought to include better particulars and documents missed due to change of advocate was allowed despite issues being framed. (Paras 1-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the plaintiff should be permitted to amend the plaint to include better particulars and documents which were missed out due to change of advocate, despite issues having been framed.
Final Decision
Chamber Summons allowed. Plaintiff permitted to carry out amendment as per schedule within two weeks. Defendants to file additional written statement within four weeks thereafter.
Law Points
- Liberal approach to amendment of pleadings
- Order VI Rule 17 CPC
- Amendment before trial
- Minimize litigation
- Real controversy
Case Details
2014 LawText (BOM) (01) 30
Chamber Summons No. 1791 of 2011 in Suit No. 119 of 2001
Ms. Shilpa Kapil for Plaintiff, Mr. G.S. Hegde a/w. Ms. P.M. Bhansali for Defendants
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil suit for unspecified relief, with Chamber Summons for amendment of plaint.
Remedy Sought
Plaintiff sought to amend the plaint to include better particulars and documents.
Filing Reason
Plaintiff changed advocate and the new advocate noticed that certain better particulars and documents necessary to determine the real controversy were not included in the plaint.
Previous Decisions
Issues had already been framed in the suit.
Issues
Whether the plaintiff should be permitted to amend the plaint after issues were framed, to include better particulars and documents.
Submissions/Arguments
Plaintiff argued that the amendment was necessary to include better particulars and documents missed due to change of advocate, and to determine the real controversy.
Defendants opposed, stating that issues were already framed and the amendment was intended to nullify their defence on jurisdiction and maintainability.
Ratio Decidendi
The court has wide power and unfettered discretion under Order VI Rule 17 CPC to allow amendment at any stage, especially prior to trial, to decide the real question in controversy and minimize litigation. Amendments should be liberally allowed if they do not cause injustice to the other side.
Judgment Excerpts
It is trite law that the Court has to take a liberal view in allowing the application for amendment which are filed prior to the commencement of the trial and which are necessary to decide the matter in controversy.
In view of the proviso to Order VI, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the Court has wide power and unfettered discretion to allow the amendment at any stage of proceedings.
The main purpose of allowing the amendment is to minimize litigation.
Procedural History
Suit No. 119 of 2001 was filed by the plaintiff. Issues were framed. Plaintiff changed advocate and filed Chamber Summons No. 1791 of 2011 seeking amendment of plaint. Defendants filed affidavit-in-reply opposing the amendment. The court heard both sides and allowed the Chamber Summons on 22 January 2014.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order VI Rule 17
