ORDER

This Misc. Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India at the instance of petitioner/ husband is directed against the order dated 01-12-2018 whereby application filed under Order VI Rule 17 CPC seeking amendment in the suit seeking divorce, was partly dismissed.

2. A suit for divorce was filed on 25-03-2017 by the petitioner before the Family Court under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act primarily on the ground of cruelty and thereafter, the application for amendment was filed on 03- 08-2018. After passing of the impugned order and filing of the instant miscellaneous petition, written statement has been filed by the respondent/wife.

3 . Learned counsel for the petitioner while taking exception to the impugned order inter alia submitted that proposed amendment would neither change the nature of the suit nor the relief. Through the application, certain subsequent events of cruelty which occurred after filing of the plaint are sought to be brought on record to substantiate the allegations of cruelty; ground for divorce. The Court below did not appreciate the aforesaid fact and by the impugned evasive order has partly rejected the application for amendment.

4. It is further submitted that procedural laws are made to ensure fair trial / adjudication and not to cause any prejudice to either party. Respondent/ defendant-wife shall have opportunity to contest the grounds sought to be incorporated through amendment by filing either amendment in the written statement or additional written statement. Evidence is yet to start.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that alleged incidences of cruelty sought to be brought on record in fact were in the knowledge of the petitioner at the time of filing of the suit. No reason much less plausible reason for not pleading the same facts in the original suit was assigned by the petitioner. Hence, at this stage, amendment to that extent has rightly been rejected by the Family Court.

6. Before adverting to the contentions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, it is expedient to reiterate the settled law in the context of the procedural law. Indeed, procedural laws are made to ensure fair procedure to be followed by the Courts entrusted with the work of adjudication or trial of dispute or complaint before it. The underlying principle is to do complete justice between the parties. Nevertheless, Courts are also required to ensure that recourse to procedural laws by either party is not intended to impede the course of justice or obstruct the administration of justice.

7. Labyrinth of adversarial procedure must be avoided to secure fair and timely justice. Turning to the factual matrix in hand, the suit for divorce was filed in the year 2017. Prior to filing of the written statement, the instant application for amendment has been filed for incorporation of certain instances of cruelty allegedly occurred after filing of the suit. No prejudice as rightly contended by Shri Bharadwaj shall be caused to respondent/ defendant-wife if the amendment is allowed, as defendant/ respondent-wife shall have full right to contest the same either by filing additional written statement or amendment in the written statement filed subsequent to passing of the impugned order.

8 . Consequently, to secure ends of justice between the parties, the impugned order dated 01-12-2018 so far as it disallows the amendment in the plaint is set aside. The application for amendment so filed by the petitioner stands allowed in toto.

9. With the aforesaid, the writ petition stands disposed of. (ROHIT ARYA) JUDGE vc