Back
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
SSR INTERNATIONAL THROUGH ITS PROPREITOR ABHAY KUMAR SINGHAL – Appellant
Versus
TRIVENI ENGINEERING AND INDUSTRIES LIMITED SUGAR UNIT SABITGARH – Respondent
What is the procedure for amending a plaint after the conclusion of final arguments? What is the curability of a defect in a plaint for non-filing of a statement of truth? What are the rights of parties when an amendment to a plaint is allowed after final arguments?
Key Points: - The petition challenges an order dismissing the Petitioner's application under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) seeking amendment of the plaint after the conclusion of final arguments (!) . - The suit was filed seeking recovery of Rs. 5,29,507.50/- from the Respondent (!) . - The Petitioner stated that the plaint was instituted without a statement of truth as it was initially filed as an ordinary suit, and this defect was not pointed out until final arguments (!) (!) (!) . - An earlier application by the Petitioner under Order VII Rule 10A read with Section 151 of CPC seeking return of the plaint was dismissed (!) . - The Petitioner then filed an application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC to amend the plaint and enclose the statement of truth (!) . - The Respondent's counsel admitted that the defect of non-filing of a statement of truth is curable, citing a Division Bench judgment (!) . - The Respondent agreed to the amendment being allowed without re-opening arguments, as the amendment was formal in nature (!) (!) . - The Court allowed the Petitioner's application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC, holding that the defect is curable based on the Division Bench judgment (!) . - The impugned order of the Trial Court was set aside, and the amended plaint was directed to be taken on record (!) . - It was directed that no re-hearing would be necessary, and the defect in the plaint for non-filing of the statement of truth would not be a basis for dismissal of the suit (!) . - Parties were directed to file an appropriate application and place the order before the Trial Court (!) .
J U D G M E N T
MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J (ORAL):
CM APPL. 63210/2023 (for exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of.
CM(M) 2009/2023 & CM APPL. 63211/2023
1. This petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India impugns the order dated 09.11.2023 passed by the District Judge (Commercial Court)-02, East District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi (‘Trial Court’) in CS (COMM.) No. 454/2019, titled as ‘M/s SSR International v. Triveni Engineering & Industries Ltd. and Anr.’, whereby the Petitioner’s application filed under Order VI Rule 17 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (‘CPC’) seeking amendment of the plaint after the conclusion of the final arguments, has been dismissed by the Trial Court.
1.1. The Petitioner is the plaintiff and the Respondent is the defendant. The suit has been filed seeking recovery of Rs. 5,29,507.50/- from the Respondent.
2. The Petitioner appears in person and has addressed the arguments. He states that the plaint was registered on 26.11.2019 and was duly accompanied with a supporting affidavit, however, no statement of truth was filed as the suit was instituted as an ordinary suit.
2.1. He stat
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
