The Madras High Court dismissed an amendment application in a civil suit. The court held that allowing the amendment would sanction a course of action prohibited by legal principles regarding specific performance and damages.
Application for amendment to plaint dismissed; parties to bear their respective costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
(ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION)
WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.SUNDAR
A. No.2793 of 2018 in C.S. No.778 of 2014
M/s. Trans Freight Shipping Services Represented by its Proprietor Mr.H.Ramesh S/o. Late S.Haridas Plot No.179, TSS Tower, Kavuri Hills, Phase II, Madhapur, Hyderabad - 81 Telangana State. ... Applicant/Plaintiff
-Versus-
Mr.N.K.Shashi Kumar No.89-A, Santhome High Road, Raja Annamallaipuram, Chennai 28. ... Respondent/Defendant
Application praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to permit the Applicant/Plaintiff to amend the plaint in C.S.No.778 of 2014 as detailed in the particulars of amendment in the accompanying judges summons.
This application having been heard on 29.08.2018 in the presence of Mr.Arun C.Mohan, for Mr.D.Sai Kumaran, Advocate for the Applicant herein, and Mr.T.Mohan for Ms.Shanthi Meenakshi, Advocates for the respondent herein and upon reading the judges summons and the affidavit of Mr.H.Ramesh, filed herein, and having stood over for consideration till this date coming on this day before this court for orders of this court in the presence of the said advocates for the parties hereto, and this court having https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ observed that this is precisely what the plaintiff is attempting to do in the instant case by pursuing this
2
amendment application, in other words, if the prayer in amendment application is acceded to, it would tantamount to permitting the plaintiff to seek fro specific performance of share purchase agreement dated 14.06.2010 qua consultancy company after rescinding the alleged breach and seeking damages for the same, further to be noted, the plaintiff is continuing to seek damages qua consultancy company, in effect acceding to the prayer in the instant application would tantamount to allowing the plaintiff to do what they are prohibited from doing in the light of the principle laid down, it is ordered as follows:-
That the A.No. 2793 of 2018 be and is hereby dismissed.
WITNESS THE HON'BLE SHRIMATI.VIJAYA KAMLESH TAHILRAMANI, THE CHIEF JUSTICE, HIGH COURT AT MADRAS AFORESAID, THIS THE 12th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018.
Sd./-
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR(O.S.II)
//Certified to be true copy//
Dated at Madras this the day of 2018.
COURT OFFICER(O.S.)
From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.
3
sk 01.10.2018
A. No.2793 of 2018 in C.S. No.778 of 2014
ORDER
DATED : 12.09.2018
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR
FOR APPROVAL: 04.10.2018
APPROVED ON: 04.10.2018
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an amendment application to the plaint should be permitted when it would effectively allow the plaintiff to seek specific performance and damages after alleging rescission, contrary to establi
M/s. Trans Freight Shipping Services Represented by its Proprietor Mr.H.Ramesh S/o. Late S.Haridas
Mr.N.K.Shashi Kumar
M Sundar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
