Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Vikas s/o Prem Somkuwar, filed a civil suit against the respondents, Kailas s/o Panjabrao Dunedar and Bhadant Nagarjun Surai Sasai, on 19 June 2015, seeking reliefs of declaration and permanent injunction in respect of suit land. The petitioner claimed that he was in possession of the suit land and that the respondents were disturbing his possession. The suit proceeded on these pleas and reached the stage of arguments. At that stage, the petitioner filed an application for amendment of the plaint under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC). The proposed amendment sought to insert pleas that the petitioner was forcibly dispossessed by the respondents on 1 April 2015, i.e., before the filing of the suit, and that a false criminal complaint filed by the respondents under Sections 447 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (R.C.C. No.89/2015) resulted in the petitioner's acquittal on 18 November 2017. The petitioner also sought a prayer for possession of the suit land. The trial court rejected the amendment application by order dated 19 June 2018, and a subsequent identical application was also rejected on 13 July 2018. The petitioner challenged both orders in the present writ petition. The High Court, after hearing the parties, observed that the amendment did not change the nature of the suit, as the suit was already for declaration and injunction based on possession. The court noted that the amendment only sought to clarify the fact of dispossession and bring on record subsequent events, which were necessary for effective adjudication. The court held that a liberal approach should be adopted for pre-trial amendments and that the trial court had erred in rejecting the application. Accordingly, the High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the impugned orders, and permitted the petitioner to amend the plaint subject to payment of costs of Rs.5,000 to each respondent.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Amendment of Plaint - Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Pre-trial Amendment - The plaintiff sought to amend the plaint to include a plea that he was forcibly dispossessed before the suit and that a false criminal complaint filed by the defendants resulted in his acquittal. The trial court rejected the amendment on the ground that it would change the nature of the suit. The High Court held that the amendment did not change the nature of the suit as the suit was already for declaration and injunction based on possession, and the amendment only clarified the fact of dispossession and subsequent events. The court emphasized that a liberal approach should be adopted for pre-trial amendments and that the amendment was necessary for effective adjudication. (Paras 6-8) B) Civil Procedure - Amendment of Pleadings - Order VI Rule 17 CPC - Subsequent Events - The proposed amendment included a plea that the plaintiff was acquitted in a criminal case filed by the defendants after the suit was instituted. The High Court held that such subsequent events could be brought on record by way of amendment to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and to enable the court to decide the real controversy. (Para 7) C) Civil Procedure - Amendment of Plaint - Order VI Rule 17 CPC - Change in Nature of Suit - The trial court had rejected the amendment on the ground that it would change the nature of the suit from one based on possession to one based on title. The High Court disagreed, noting that the suit was already for declaration and permanent injunction, and the amendment did not introduce a new cause of action but only elaborated on the existing claim. The court held that the amendment was necessary to bring the correct facts on record. (Paras 6-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court was justified in rejecting the plaintiff's application for amendment of the plaint seeking to incorporate pleas of forcible dispossession before the suit and subsequent acquittal in a criminal case, on the ground that it would change the nature of the suit and introduce a new case.
Final Decision
Writ petition allowed. Impugned orders dated 19/06/2018 and 13/07/2018 are set aside. The petitioner is permitted to amend the plaint subject to payment of costs of Rs.5,000 to each respondent.
Law Points
- Amendment of pleadings
- Order VI Rule 17 CPC
- Liberal approach to amendment
- Pre-trial amendment
- Change in nature of suit
- Introduction of new case
- Dispossession plea
- Subsequent event
- Effective adjudication
