The main legal point established in the judgment is that where there is a misdescription of parties, the court can allow an amendment at any time, and the question of limitation would not arise in such a case.

N. D. VENKATESH, J.

( 1 ) THE respondents, who have initiated a proceeding against these petitioners under the provisions of the Karnataka rent Control Act, 1961, in H. R. C, No 309 of 1975 on the file of the VIII Addl. Civil Judge, Bangalore City, sought for an amendment of the cause title of their petition to make certain corrections in the addresses of these petitioners who are arrayed as opponents therein That application was allowed The petitioners are challenging the correctness of that order (vide the order dated 6-8-1980 of the court below on I. A. 7 and 8 ).

( 2 ) THE contention of the petitioners in this petition is that the amendment has completely changed the very nature of the case and the order of the Court below permitting suoh an amendment was in excess of the powers conferred on it under Or. VI, R. 17 CPC.

( 3 ) NOW, under Or. VI, R. 17 an amendment of pleading should not be permitted if such an amendment, (i) is not necessary for deciding the real question in controversy; (ii) takes away from the defendant a legal right which has accrued to him by lapse of time; (iii) introduces a totally different, new, and inconsistent case or in effect it substitutes one distinct cause of action for another or changes the character of the suit; or (iv) if the application is not made in good faith.

( 4 ) IN the instant case what the landlords say is that there has been a misdescription of the tenants in their application, that that was required to be corrected and, therefore, they had made that request. The prties, who are arrayed as respondents to the petition in the court below, are : (i) the Secretary, Sri Swamy vivekananda Vidyashala and - (ii) the headmaster, Sri Swamy Vivekananda vidyashala According to the landlords, though the persons who had taken this premises on lease and were in occupation of the same were the secretary and the Head-Master of that instituation. the name of the institution is not Sn Swamy Vivekananda Vidyashala but is Sri Swamy Vivekananda Education and Cultural Society. He requested that the words Sri Swamy Vivekananda Vidyashala appearing after the words the Secretary and the Head-Master respectively in the cause-title be struck off and in the place of those words "sri Swamy Vivekananda Education and Cultural Society" be added. Further, he seeks a consequential amendment in para 4 of the petition as set out in his application seeking the amendment.

( 5 ) WHAT may amount to misdescription of the party is stated as follows in (in para-15 ). "a case can properly be said to be a case of misdescription when the party, really intended to be impleaded, had always been the same and such intention appeared clearly from the body of the plaint in spite of the inaccurate description in the cause title and what an amendment does, in such cases, is not to add a new party to the suit or substitute a new party for the original one, but to make the identity of the party originally impleaded clearer by amending or rectifying the inaccurate description. When the same person, whether an individual or a legal entity, remains the defendant but only the name is altered, there is a case of amending a misdescription. But where a new legal entity is substituted for another, it cannot correctly be said that the original error was a mere misdescription and that, by the amendment, no change of a substantial character affecting the right of any party is being effected. "in this connection the landlord's say that it was the Secretary of that institution and the Head-Master of that school who had negotiated and taken this premises on lease assumes significance As persons who had obtained the premises on lease they were already on record It is nobody's case that Sri Swami Vivekananda vidyashala is a legal entity. The legal entity is Sri Swami Vivekananda Education and Cultural Society. There is no substitution of one legal entity in the place of another already brought on record. In the circumstances we can say that in the inst

Click Here to Read the rest of this document