( 1 ) THIS is an appeal against the order dated 10th September 1996 passed by the learned Single Judge in IA No. 7725/93 in Suit No. 1237/82 filed by the original plaintiffs/appellants, M/s. Indian Export House Pvt. Ltd. (now Ltd.) herein disallowing an application for amendment of the plaint moved by the plaintiff.

( 2 ) THE brief facts of the case stated by the appellant are that respondent No. 1, a partnership firm of Shri K. L. Suri (impleaded as defendant No. 2 in the Suit, since deceased and represented by respondents No. 2a, 2b, 2c, 3 and 4 as his legal heir) and respondents 3 and 4, through its partner, Shri K. L. Suri, represented to be an agent of respondent No. 10 (a firm of respondents No. 11 and 12) and induced the appellant to enter into contract dated 11th June 1979 with respondent No. 10 for the import of PVC Resin, arranged a contract with respondent No. 9 in absentia, arranged advance payment on behalf of respondent No. 9 towards margin money for opening the Letter of credit and further entered into contract with the appellant undertaking to open inland Letter of Credit on arrival of shipping documents and to indemnity the appellant towards loss. It is further stated that at the instance of the appellant a letter of Credit No. 1bd/101/8512 dated 15th June 1979 was issued by -respondent No. 6, Punjab and Sind Bank in favour of M/s Bentrex and Co. of Singapore, respondent No. 10, a firm of respondents No. 11 and 12. The negotiation of the Letter of Credit was restricted to Alegemene Bank Netherlands (ABN), respondent No. 7. It is further stated that insurance cover and policy was arranged by respondents 1 to 4 and 9 with respondent No. 5 and premium was paid by the appellant in pursuance to the agreement, Vide cable dated 8th August 1979, M/s Bentrex and Co. , respondent No. 10, informed the appellant that the vessel averilla carrying the goods had sunk. M/s Llyod s Intelligence Services vide their letter dated 27th June 1980, confirmed that the said. vessel "averilla" alongwith the cargo sank on 5th September, 1979. It is further stated that the appellant being totally ignorant of any fraud, asked respondents 1 to 4 to perform their obligations under the contract, but they did not respond. It is stated that the appellant who had full faith and trust in its Banker, believing all the representations made by PSB (respondent No. 6) to be true and having no reason to suspect any conspiracy or fraud, or Bank s involvement their in made a payment of Rs. 39 lakhs to PSB during the period 21st February, 1980 to 2nd September, 1983, in relation to L. C. and under the dictates of the Bank, admitted the liability to pay and even signed the pronotes. It is further stated that the appellant being ignorant of fraud asked the Insurance Company Respondent No. 5 to meet the liability under insurance policies but with no result. It is stated that under the aforesaid circumstances, the appellant instituted Suit No. 1237/82 originally against respondents 1 to 3 and subsequently vide order of amendment dated 30th September, 1985 also against respondents 4 and 5. It is further stated that the applicant received letter dated 6th November, 1986 from the CBI to the effect that the Export Houses of India including the appellant are victims of fraud of the conspirators. In March 1987, the appellant received copy of the plaint in Suit No. 2554/86 filed by PSB (respondent No. 6) against the appellant and others for recovery of the alleged balance amount pertaining to the same L. C. (Letter of Credit) transaction, with averments in para 3 of its plaint that the documents under the L. C. were presented by ABN (respondent No. 7) and further averment in para 11 of the plaint that it (PSB) bad released payment to the foreign bank under the L. C. detailed in para 3. On receipt of the copy of the plaint in the said suit, the appellant scrutinised its records and found that the documents under the L. C. had been negotiated and p