Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, plaintiffs in O.S. No.39/2013 before the Senior Civil Judge Court at Challakere, filed writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 22.08.2014 dismissing their application under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC (IA No.6). The plaintiffs had initially filed a suit, and the defendant (respondent No.1) amended the written statement. The plaintiffs sought to file a reply/rejoinder to the amended written statement by filing an application under Order 8 Rule 9 CPC, which was rejected by the trial court on the ground that there is no provision for reply/rejoinder in the CPC. Consequently, the plaintiffs filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC to amend the plaint to address the amendments in the written statement. The trial court dismissed this application as well, leading to the present writ petitions. The High Court noted that Order 8 Rule 9 CPC empowers the court to permit additional pleadings. While there is no specific definition of 'reply' or 'rejoinder' in Section 2 CPC, the Karnataka Civil Rules of Practice (Chapter I, Rule 3(2)) defines pleadings to include plaint, written statement, and other documents. The court reasoned that if a plaint is amended, the defendant is given an opportunity to file an additional written statement; similarly, if a written statement is amended, the plaintiff should be given an opportunity to file an additional pleading in the nature of a reply/rejoinder. The court held that the trial court erred in rejecting the application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, as the proper remedy was to allow the plaintiffs to file a rejoinder under Order 8 Rule 9 CPC. The High Court set aside the impugned order and permitted the plaintiffs to file a reply/rejoinder to the amended written statement within four weeks from the date of receipt of the order. The writ petitions were allowed accordingly.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Rejoinder to Amended Written Statement - Order 8 Rule 9 CPC - Right to File Additional Pleading - The court held that when a written statement is amended, the plaintiff should be given an opportunity to file an additional pleading in the nature of a reply/rejoinder, though not specifically defined under Section 2 CPC. The trial court's rejection of the application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC was set aside, and the plaintiff was permitted to file a reply/rejoinder to the amended written statement within four weeks. (Paras 2-5)
B) Civil Procedure - Amendment of Plaint - Order 6 Rule 17 CPC - Alternative Remedy - The court observed that the plaintiff's application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC was necessitated by the dismissal of the earlier application under Order 8 Rule 9 CPC. Since the plaintiff is entitled to file a rejoinder under Order 8 Rule 9, the amendment of plaint was not required. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a plaintiff is entitled to file a reply/rejoinder to an amended written statement, and whether the trial court erred in rejecting the application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC for amendment of plaint.
Final Decision
The writ petitions are allowed. The impugned order dated 22.08.2014 passed in O.S. No.39/2013 by the Senior Civil Judge Court at Challakere is set aside. The petitioners are permitted to file a reply/rejoinder to the amended written statement within four weeks from the date of receipt of the order.
Law Points
- Right to file rejoinder to amended written statement
- Order 8 Rule 9 CPC
- Order 6 Rule 17 CPC
- Karnataka Civil Rules of Practice
- Pleadings definition
Case Details
2015 LawText (KAR) (06) 5
Writ Petition Nos. 47014-47015 of 2014 (GM-CPC)
Sri. Madhukar Nadig for petitioners, Sri. S.S.Koti for respondent No.1, Sri. Anantha H., HCGP for respondents 2 to 4
Sree Abed Hussain and Smt. Beebijahan
Smt. Thaherabanu, Taluk Block Education Officer (BEO), Accountant General, Government of Karnataka
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil writ petition challenging rejection of application for amendment of plaint under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners (plaintiffs) sought to set aside the order dated 22.08.2014 dismissing their application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC and to permit them to file a reply/rejoinder to the amended written statement.
Filing Reason
The trial court rejected the plaintiffs' application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC to amend the plaint, after having earlier rejected their application under Order 8 Rule 9 CPC to file a reply/rejoinder to the amended written statement.
Previous Decisions
The trial court rejected the application under Order 8 Rule 9 CPC holding that there is no provision for reply/rejoinder in CPC. Subsequently, the application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC was also dismissed on 22.08.2014.
Issues
Whether a plaintiff is entitled to file a reply/rejoinder to an amended written statement under the CPC?
Whether the trial court erred in rejecting the application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC for amendment of plaint?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that they were constrained to file the amendment application because their earlier application under Order 8 Rule 9 CPC was rejected, and they needed to respond to the amended written statement.
Respondent No.1 did not appear; other respondents were represented by government counsel.
Ratio Decidendi
When a written statement is amended, the plaintiff should be given an opportunity to file an additional pleading in the nature of a reply/rejoinder, though not specifically defined under Section 2 CPC. Order 8 Rule 9 CPC empowers the court to permit additional pleadings. The Karnataka Civil Rules of Practice define pleadings broadly to include such replies. Therefore, the trial court erred in rejecting the application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, as the proper remedy was to allow the plaintiffs to file a rejoinder under Order 8 Rule 9 CPC.
Judgment Excerpts
If a plaint is amended defendant will be given an opportunity for filing additional written statement. In the same manner if written statement is amended, plaintiff should be given an opportunity to file an additional pleading in the nature of a reply/rejoinder, though it is not specifically defined under Section 2 of CPC.
Chapter I (3)(2) of Karnataka Civil Rules of Practice defines pleadings. 'Pleadings shall include plaint, written statement, memorandum of appeals, cross-objections, original petitions, applications, ...'
Procedural History
The petitioners filed O.S. No.39/2013 before the Senior Civil Judge Court at Challakere. The defendant (respondent No.1) amended the written statement. The plaintiffs filed an application under Order 8 Rule 9 CPC to file a reply/rejoinder, which was rejected. Thereafter, they filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC to amend the plaint, which was dismissed on 22.08.2014. Challenging that order, the present writ petitions were filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC): Order 6 Rule 17, Order 8 Rule 9, Section 151, Section 2
- Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
- Karnataka Civil Rules of Practice: Chapter I, Rule 3(2)
