Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, original plaintiffs, filed a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 01.08.1994 executed by the predecessor-in-title of the defendants. The suit was filed in 1995. After the trial had commenced and evidence was being recorded, the plaintiffs filed an application under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking to amend the plaint. The proposed amendment sought to convert the suit from one for specific performance to a suit for declaration of title and possession, and also to add a prayer for declaration that the agreement to sell was in fact a deed of sale. The trial court rejected the amendment application, and the plaintiffs challenged that order by way of a writ petition. The High Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the amendment would change the entire nature and character of the suit and introduce a new and inconsistent case. The court also held that the amendment was barred by limitation as the new relief would be time-barred, and that the plaintiffs had failed to exercise due diligence in seeking the amendment at an earlier stage. The court upheld the trial court's order and dismissed the writ petition with costs.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Amendment of Plaint - Order VI Rule 17 CPC - Permissibility of amendment changing nature of suit - The plaintiffs sought to amend the plaint to convert a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell into a suit for declaration of title and possession. The court held that such an amendment would change the entire nature and character of the suit and introduce a new and inconsistent case, which is not permissible. The amendment was also barred by limitation as the new relief would be time-barred. (Paras 10-15) B) Civil Procedure - Amendment of Plaint - Due Diligence - Order VI Rule 17 CPC - The court noted that the plaintiffs failed to exercise due diligence in seeking the amendment at an earlier stage, as the facts were known to them from the beginning. The proviso to Order VI Rule 17 requires that the party could not have raised the matter before the commencement of trial despite due diligence. (Paras 16-18)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the amendment of the plaint seeking to convert a suit for specific performance into a suit for declaration of title and possession is permissible under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the trial court's order rejecting the amendment application. The court held that the amendment would change the entire nature and character of the suit and introduce a new and inconsistent case, and that the plaintiffs failed to exercise due diligence. The petition was dismissed with costs.
Law Points
- Amendment of pleadings
- Order VI Rule 17 CPC
- Change of nature of suit
- Inconsistent plea
- Bar of limitation
- Due diligence
