Back
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
VINAY JOSHI, J
M/s. A. S. Polymers Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
M/s. Sun Plastics – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. typographical amendments in legal complaints. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments against the amendment claim. (Para 5 , 8) |
| 3. court's supporting observation on evidence. (Para 7 , 9) |
| 4. permissibility of amendments for corrections. (Para 10) |
| 5. final conclusion and disposal of the petition. (Para 11) |
RULE. Rule is made returnable forthwith.
2. Heard finally by consent of respective parties.
3. A short challenge has been raised to the rejection of the amendment application by the Trial Court. The petitioner is complainant in SCC No. 316407/2015 relating to the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (‘N.I. Act’). The petitioner sought amendment into the cause title of the complaint. Precisely, the complaint is filed by M/s. A. S. Polymers Private Ltd. Co. through its Manager Mr. Surendra Sharma. It is the petitioner’s contention that Mr. Surendra Sharma is a Director and thus, a typographical error occurred by mentioning him as a “Manager” instead of “Director”. To that extent, the petitioner sought amendment in the complaint, however it was rejected.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the proposed amend
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
