Three Judge Bench, Single Judge disposed of the matter. The High Court dismissed the revision petition against the trial court's order rejecting an application to amend the plaint.
The application for amendment of plaint was dismissed without prejudice.
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.
C.R. No. 5744 of 2009 [1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
C.R. No. 5744 of 2009
Date of Decision: October 14, 2009
Sat Parkash Bhalla
…..Appellant
Vs.
Raj Kumar and others
…..Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI.
-.-
Present:Mr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.
-.-
M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL)
In the garb of an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, the plaintiff- petitioner had sought to incorporate an additional plea on the basis of a fresh cause of action and to implead additional plaintiff No.2 i.e. Sathan Satti Mata (Deity) through himself after a gap of six years of filing of the initial suit.
Vide impugned order the said application for amendment of plaint has been dismissed.
C.R. No. 5744 of 2009 [2]
Taking into consideration the stage of the case and other facts and circumstances, I do not find any impropriety in the impugned order. In case the amendment is allowed it will certainly change the nature of the suit and will set at naught all the proceedings which have already been undertaken by the trial Court. It is always open to the person which is sought to be added, to file a fresh suit on the basis of a cause of action which on the face of it, appears to be fresh. No ground is made out for interference.
Dismissed.
Dismissal of the application by the trial Court or dismissal of this revision petition will not prejudice the rights of the plaintiff to proceed in accordance with law on the basis of alleged fresh cause of action.
October 14, 2009 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE
3 issues framed by the court
Whether interference with the trial court's order dismissing the application for amendment of plaint is justified.
Whether allowing the amendment would change the nature of the suit and set aside prior proceedings.
Whether the person sought to be impleaded can file a fresh suit on a fresh cause of action.
Sat Parkash Bhalla
Raj Kumar and others
M.M.S. BEDI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
