CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 — Order VI Rule 17 — Amendment of plaint — Real test (Paras 9, 12, 16)
The true test for allowing amendment is whether it alters the fundamental nature or character of the suit or introduces a completely new cause of action. Where the amendment only supplements the existing pleadings without disturbing the basic structure, it ought to be allowed.
AMENDMENT — CONSEQUENTIAL RELIEF — Recovery of possession — Permissibility (Paras 7, 11, 12)
Addition of relief of recovery of possession, when dispossession is already pleaded in the original plaint and consequential injunction is sought, is merely a consequential relief and does not amount to introducing a new case.
SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT, 1963 — Section 34 — Bar against mere declaration (Para 13)
Where the plaintiff is in a position to seek further relief such as recovery of possession but omits to do so, a bare suit for declaration is not maintainable. Amendment to include such relief is necessary to avoid dismissal of the suit on this ground and to advance substantial justice.
LIMITATION — Amendment — Relation to original cause — 12-year rule (Para 14)
Amendment seeking recovery of possession is not barred if filed within 12 years from the date of dispossession. Where dispossession is pleaded as having occurred shortly before filing of the suit, and amendment is sought within such period, the amendment is within limitation.
AMENDMENT — Multiplicity of proceedings — Avoidance (Para 14)
Courts should permit amendment to include relief of possession to avoid multiplicity of proceedings, especially where such relief arises out of the same cause of action already pleaded.
INCONSISTENT PLEAS — Plaintiffs — Scope and stage (Paras 10, 12, 15)
Though plaintiffs cannot substitute their original case with mutually destructive pleas, objections regarding inconsistency of pleadings relate to merits of the case and are to be adjudicated at trial. Such objections are not grounds to reject an amendment which is otherwise limited and consequential.
AMENDMENT — Withdrawal of admissions — Restriction (Para 10)
An amendment that seeks to withdraw a clear admission in the original pleading is generally impermissible. However, where no such withdrawal occurs and only additional relief is sought, amendment can be allowed.
AMENDMENT — Accrued rights of opposite party — Test (Para 15)
Amendment should not be permitted if it defeats a vested right accrued to the opposite party or introduces an entirely new and inconsistent case. Where no such prejudice is caused, amendment ought to be allowed.
REVISION — Article 227 — Interference — Limits (Para 16)
Where the trial Court exercises discretion judiciously in allowing amendment and no illegality or perversity is shown, the High Court will not interfere under Article 227.
FINAL RESULT (Paras 16, 17)
Civil Revision Petition dismissed — Order allowing amendment upheld — No costs.
