HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA, J
MANOHAR SINGH S/O JORAVAR SINGH – Appellant
Versus
JHABAR SINGH S/O GULAB SINGH – Respondent
CW / 16571 / 2024
Order :
1. This Civil Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner-plaintiff (for short 'the plaintiff') against the order dated 29.08.2024 passed by Civil Judge & Judicial Magistrate, Sambhar Lake, District Jaipur in Civil Suit No.45/2024, whereby application dismissed.
2. Learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance and permanent injunction against the respondents-defendants (for short 'the defendants') in which plaintiff filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, which was allowed by the trial court and the subsequent purchasers were impleaded as party defendant. Learned counsel for the plaintiff also submits that plaintiff filed amended plaint including consequential amendment as per order 1 Rule 10 CPC, but the defendant No.3 raised objection before the trial court by filing the application under Section 151 CPC. The trial court vide order dated 01.06.2024 allowed the application filed by the defendant No.3 and placed the amended plaint in part D of the record.
3. Learned counsel for the plaintiff also submits that plaintiff filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC for amendment in the pleadings but trial court vide order dated 29.08.2024 dismissed the application filed by the plaintiff.
4. Learned counsel for the plaintiff also submits that when trial court had allowed the application filed by the plaintiff under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, the plaintiff had filed the amended plaint on account of subsequent amendment. He also submits that without filing amended plaint, no purpose would be served in allowing the application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC. So, consequential amendment had to be taken on record by the trial court. Thus, the order dated 29.08.2024 passed by the trial court rejecting the aside.
5. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the plaintiff and perused the impugned order.
6. It is an admitted position that on account of subsequent sale, trial court allowed the application filed by the plaintiff under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC and impleaded the subsequent purchasers as party defendant. So, in my considered opinion, trial court had committed error in keeping amended plaint filed by the plaintiff in part D of the record on the basis of application filed by the defendant No.3 under Section 151 CPC. The trial court had also committed error in rejecting the application filed by the plaintiff under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC because on account of subsequent sale, the plaintiff is entitled to carry out the amendment in the plaint. So, petition filed by the plaintiff deserves to be allowed.
7. The Civil Writ Petition filed by the plaintiff is allowed. The order dated 29.08.2024 passed by the trial court is set aside and trial court is directed to take the amended plaint filed by the plaintiff on record.
8. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.
A plaintiff is entitled to amend their plaint when subsequent parties are added, and a trial court's refusal to accept such amendments is erroneous.
Application for amendment - Provision of Order VI Rule 17 CPC clear that at any stage of proceedings Court may allow either party to alter or amend pleadings as may be necessary for purpose of determ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the court has the discretion to allow the necessary amendments in pleadings and can impose costs for frivolous litigation.
The court's decision emphasized that an amendment under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC should not change the nature or character of the suit or its cause of action.
Court emphasized a liberal approach in allowing amendments under Order VI Rule 17, especially when necessary for complete adjudication and no significant prejudice to other party is caused.
Amendment to correct typographical error in plaint's property khasra number and area allowed at early stage before written statement, as it does not alter suit nature or cause action, with no due dil....
Amendment in plaint – In terms of Order VI, Rule 17 of CPC, Court may at any stage of proceedings allow either of parties to alter or amend pleadings, in such manner or on such terms, as may be just.
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.