The court has the power to extend the time for filing an amended plaint even after the expiry of the period originally fixed, if the party seeking amendment makes out a proper case.

JUDGMENT :

A. Pasayat, J. - An interesting question, though simple in its appearance but deceptive in nature, relating to scope and ambit of Order 6, Rule 18 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short, the Code') falls for consideration in this writ application.

2. The factual position is undisputed and, therefore, a brief reference to it would suffice.

Petitioner is the plaintiff in Title Suit No. 163 of 1984 pending before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jagatsinghpur. During pendency of the suit, an application under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Code was filed on 28-7-1993 for amendment of the plaint. Prayer was made to delete paragraph 4 (a) of the plaint and to make certain other changes. Opp. party Nos. 1 to 12 are defendants in the suit. They filed objection to the prayer for amendment on 21-12-1993. however, the learned Civil Judge accepted the prayer for amendment subject to payment of Rs. 100/- as cost which was paid on 24-11-1994, and the suit was posted to 7-12-1994 for filing consolidated copy of the plaint incorporating the amendments. The suit was again posted to 21-12-1994, and was further posted to 6-1-1995, 7-1-1995, 17-1-1995 and 2-2-1995. On 24-2-1995 s consolidated plaint was filed wherein paragraphs 4 (a) and 4 (b) of the original plaint were deleted, and the case was adjourned to 31-3-1995 for filing of additional written statement. " At this juncture it was noticed that there had been deletion of paragraph 4 (b). When the defect was noticed a prayer was made to prepone the date and a corrected consolidated plaint deleting only paragraph 4 (a) of the original plaint was filed, and prayer was made to accept the same. On 31-3-1995 the. case was taken up and opp. party Nos. 1 to 12 raised objection regarding acceptability of corrected consolidated plaint as filed on 1-3-1995. The matter was taken up on 17-4-1995 and 27-4-1995; Prayer to accept the corrected consolidated plaint filed on 1-3-1995 was rejected. A petition was filed styled as one under Order 6. Rule 18 of the Code for acceptance of the corrected consolidated plaint, but the prayer was rejected. It was held that in view of the failure to amend the plaint within the time granted by the Court, the petition was not acceptable. The revision preferred before the learned District Judge, Cuttack yielded no relief to the petitioner.

3. According to learned counsel for petitioner, a too technical view has been taken, and the true import of Order 6. Rule 18 of the Code has not been kept in view. The stand of the learned counsel for opp. parties on the other hand is that the provisions contained in Order 6, Rule 18 are absolute in terms and the Courts below have taken the correct view.

4. Since Order 6, Rule 18 of the Code is the pivotal provision, sams needs to be extracted. Including the Orissa Amendment, it reads as follows :

"R. 18. Failure to amend after order-

Where a party has obtained an order to amend and the amendment is excessive, within a time limited for that purpose by the order, or if no time is thereby limited, then, within fourteen days from the date of the order, he shall file a consolidated pleading incorporating the amendments, and he shall not be permitted to amend after the expiration of such limited time as aforesaid or of such fourteen days, as the case may be, unless the time is extended by the Court.

In all other cases, the Bench Clerk shall carry out the amendment."

Under Sections 33 and 54 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1877, the Court could reject a plaint if the party failed to comply with the order for amendment. There is no such provision under the Code and the only consequence of the failure to amend within time would be that he cannot amend his pleading afterwards, unless the time is extended by the Court and the suit would continue without the amendment. The Court has a discretion to extend the time even after the expiry of the period originally fixed. The Court has power under Order 6. Rule 18 to extend the time for am