IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J.
Rajender Kumar Gupta – Appellant
Versus
Gadiwala Load Services Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. – Respondents
CM(M) 53 of 2023
Decided on : 13-01-2023
Cost Imposition - Amendment of Plaint - The court allowed exemption and waived the cost imposed by the trial court for seeking adjournment for moving an appropriate application seeking amendment of the plaint. The court emphasized that the suit was at a nascent stage and any necessary amendment or correction could be allowed without prejudicing anyone, including the defendant.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner impugned the order of the trial court imposing a cost of Rs. 10,000 for seeking adjournment for moving an appropriate application seeking amendment of the plaint.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed exemption and waived the cost imposed by the trial court, emphasizing that the suit was at a nascent stage and any necessary amendment or correction could be allowed without prejudicing anyone, including the defendant.
Issues: Impugning the order imposing cost for seeking adjournment for moving an appropriate application seeking amendment of the plaint.
Ratio Decidendi: The suit being at a nascent stage, the court deemed it appropriate to waive the cost imposed by the trial court and requested the trial court to take up the application for amendment and dispose of it on merits in accordance with the law.
Final Decision: The petition was disposed of with no order as to costs.
JUDGMENT :
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J.
[The proceeding has been conducted through Hybrid mode]
CM APPL. 1665/2023 (for exemption)
1. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The application is disposed of.
CM(M) 53/2023
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner impugns the order dated 02.11.2022, whereby the learned Trial Court has imposed a cost of Rs. 10,000/- for seeking adjournment for moving an appropriate application seeking amendment of the plaint.
4. Learned counsel submits that vide the order dated 26.09.2022, the learned Trial Court while considering the contents of the plaint was of the opinion that the said plaint is ambiguous in its contents and accordingly, it deemed it appropriate to grant an opportunity to the plaintiff to amend the plaint or to remove the ambiguities and to represent the plaint in proper form.
5. Learned counsel further submits that he was engaged by the petitioner just a day prior to the impugned order dated 02.11.2022 was passed and on the said date, learned counsel sought some time to remove the ambiguities, if any, and re-file the suit in a proper form or, if required, in the form of an ordinary suit along with an appropriate application in regard thereto.
6. Learned counsel submits that the learned Trial Court imposed cost of Rs. 10,000/- while granting one opportunity to file an appropriate application.
7. It is informed by the learned counsel that an appropriate application has already been filed before the learned Trial Court on 23.12.2022 and is pending adjudication.
8. Having heard the learned counsel and in view of the fact that no notice of the suit has yet been issued to the defendant/respondent, it is deemed appropriate that no purpose would be served in issuing notice to the respondent.
9. This Court is of the opinion that the suit is at a nascent stage and any amendment or correction can be carved out and allowed by the learned Trial Court without prejudicing any one, including the defendant arrayed therein.
10. In view of the aforesaid, this Court deems it appropriate to waive the cost as imposed by the learned Trial Court and request that the learned Trial Court take up the application as filed by the learned counsel stated to have been filed on 23.12.2022 and disposed of the same on merits in accordance with law.
11. In view of the aforesaid, nothing survives further for adjudication in the present petition, the petition is disposed of with no order as to costs.
At a nascent stage of a suit, necessary amendments or corrections can be allowed without prejudicing anyone, including the defendant.
The court has the discretion to set aside the imposition of costs if it deems them to be onerous, considering the circumstances of the petitioner.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of amending the plaint when a new defendant is added to ensure that the plaintiff is not non-suited for lack of pleadings or resultan....
The court has the discretion to allow amendments to the plaint under Order VI Rule 17 CPC, especially when it would not prejudice the other party and the suit is at an advanced stage.
The court emphasizes the importance of imposing costs to ensure fairness in civil proceedings, modifying previous orders to enhance justice.
A procedural amendment related to a bank guarantee invocation should not incur costs on the petitioner, particularly when necessitated by circumstances beyond their control.
The proposed amendment to the plaint should be allowed if it is necessary for the just and proper disposal of the case and does not change the nature of the suit.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of allowing necessary amendments to the plaint when a new defendant is added in a pending suit to ensure that the plaintiff is not no....
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.