HARI LAL AGRAWAL
Indian Cable Co. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
1. This is an application in revision by the plaintiff against an order refusing amendment of the plaint on the ground that the proposed amendment, if allowed, would basically change the nature of the case.
2. The short facts are that on 30-3-1967, the petitioner despatched from Tatanagar 200 metres of cable in two cable drums to the Chief Engineer, Madras Port Trust, Madras. According to the original case in the plaint, on 7-1-1967, delivery of only one drum was given by the Railways to the consignee in highly damaged condition. the entire lot of cables being completely unfit for any use. The case regarding another drum was that it was not delivered at all. The case of the defendant railway in the written statement was that the first drum was delivered in sound condition and the cables had been fully utilised by the consignee and the second drum was also offered for delivery but delivery was refused.
3. On 31st May, 1973, the amendment petition in question was filed by the plaintiff. By this amendment the plaintiff wants to make out a case that the first drum was simply offered to the defendant (sic) and it refused to take the delivery as it was in a state of highly damage
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.