JUDGMENT

Tushar Rao Gedela, J. (Oral)

[The proceeding has been conducted through Hybrid mode]

1. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 24.11.2022 whereby the application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC, 1908 (in short "CPC") seeking amendment with respect to three letters to be inserted in paragraph 25 of the plaint in regard to valuation of the suit, was dismissed by the learned Trial Court.

2. Mr. Nikhil Malhotra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the requisite averments in respect of the amendment sought to be made are already contained in paragraph 25 of the plaint and therefore no prejudice would be caused to the respondent in case the three words "court fee and" are permitted to be inserted in paragraph 25.

3. Per Contra, Mr. Shyam Lal Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the learned Trial Court has applied its mind rightly to the application under order VI Rule 17 CPC and has rightly dismissed the said application vide the impugned order. Learned counsel supports the reasoning of the learned Trial Court in the impugned order.

4. Mr. Sharma also submits that the suit is at the stage of final hearing and both the parties have already submi