Back
SHALINDER KAUR
Ganpati Industries – Appellant
Versus
Spp Food Products Pvt. Ltd – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Shalinder Kaur, J. - The petitioner has invoked the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India directed against the impugned order dated 04.09.2023 passed by the Learned Additional District Judge-11, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "Trial Court") in CS DJ 613082/2016, titled as 'M/s S.P.P Food Products Pvt. Ltd vs. M/s Ganpati Industries & Anr.' whereby the learned Trial Court allowed the application filed by the respondent under Order VI Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as "CPC") for amendment of the plaint. The petitioner herein is defendant no. 1 before the learned Trial Court and the respondent is the plaintiff who has instituted a suit for recovery of Rs. 5,92,281/- along with interest under Order XXXVII of CPC.
2. The relevant facts for the purpose of adjudication of the present case are that M/s Ganpati Industries/petitioner herein is a firm which was allegedly managed and controlled by Mr. Pawan Jain and Mr. Pankaj Jain with its registered office at F-13, Ganpati Plaza, Sector-7, Sikandra, Agra. On the other hand, S.P.P Food Products Pvt. Ltd/respon
The amendments sought to the plaint were imperative for proper adjudication of the case and did not fundamentally change the nature of the case. The Court emphasized the applicability of Order XXX Ru....
Substitution of a plaintiff after limitation has expired is valid only from the date of substitution, not retrospectively.
An individual cannot amend her plaint to represent a partnership firm if the firm is unregistered, as it violates Section 69(2) of the Indian Partnership Act.
An amendment to a plaint is permissible if it does not change the nature of the suit or the cause of action and does not prejudice the defendants, as per Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the scope of revisional powers under Section 115 of the CPC and the principles of rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC.
The principle of res judicata prevents re-agitation of previously decided issues in subsequent applications, thus maintaining procedural integrity in litigation.
Amendments to the plaint are permissible to ensure justice, even when a defendant company is dissolved, emphasizing the continuity of liabilities in cases of amalgamation.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
