Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Amartya Deshmukh (minor) and Haribhau Deshmukh, filed a writ petition challenging the order dated 07-01-2017 passed by the learned District Judge-5, Amravati in Regular Civil Appeal 26/2015, which permitted the plaintiffs (respondents 1 to 5) to amend the plaint in Regular Civil Suit 608/2012. The suit property is agricultural land admeasuring 2 H. 6 R., originally owned by Late Krushnarao Deshmukh, who died intestate. Respondent 6 (Ramesh Deshmukh) inherited the property as a Class-I heir. The petitioners claimed that by an agreement dated 11-11-2010, they agreed to purchase the suit property for Rs.22.50 Lakh, and a sale deed for 1 H 21 R portion was executed in their favour after payment of Rs.9.30 Lakh. They alleged readiness to purchase the remaining portion, but respondents 1 to 5 (wife and children of respondent 6) issued a legal notice. The respondents 1 to 5 filed the suit for specific performance and injunction. During the pendency of the suit, they sought amendment to incorporate subsequent events and additional reliefs. The trial court allowed the amendment, which was confirmed by the appellate court. The petitioners argued that the amendment would cause irreparable injury and that the appellate court failed to consider the bar of limitation. The High Court held that the amendment was permissible under Order VI Rule 17 CPC as it was necessary for determining the real controversy between the parties. The court noted that the defendants could file an additional written statement and that no irreparable injury was caused as compensation by costs could be granted. The writ petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Amendment of Pleadings - Order VI Rule 17 CPC - Subsequent Events - The court considered whether amendment of plaint to incorporate subsequent events and additional reliefs is permissible - Held that amendment can be allowed at any stage if necessary for determining real controversy, and no irreparable injury is caused to the opposite party if compensation by costs can be granted (Paras 5-6). B) Civil Procedure - Amendment of Pleadings - Prejudice - Order VI Rule 17 CPC - The court examined whether the amendment would cause prejudice to the defendants - Held that no prejudice is caused as the defendants can file additional written statement and the amendment does not change the nature of the suit (Para 6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court and appellate court erred in allowing amendment of the plaint under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and whether the amendment would cause irreparable injury to the petitioners.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the order allowing amendment of the plaint.
Law Points
- Amendment of plaint
- Order VI Rule 17 CPC
- subsequent events
- irreparable injury
- prejudice
- limitation
