Ramesh Chandra Rai And ORS v. Dr. Jyoti Narayan Rai And ORS

Patna High Court CWJC No.6115 of 2016 (2) dt.27-07-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6115 of 2016 ====================================================== Ramesh Chandra Rai & Ors .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

Dr. Jyoti Narayan Rai & Ors .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ras Bihari Thakur For the Respondent/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MUNGESHWAR SAHOO ORAL ORDER 27-07-2016 Heard learned counsel, Mr. R.B. Thakur, appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel, Mr. V.R.P. Singh appearing for respondent No. 2.

2.

Perused the order dated 05.02.2016 passed by the Sub-Judge-III, Buxar in T.S. No. 64 of 2013, whereby the court below has allowed the amendment application.

3.

It appears that on the date of the impugned order only issues have been framed and no witness was examined on behalf of either party.

4.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Revajeetu Builders and Developers Vs. M/s. Narayanaswamy & Sons and Ors. reported in 2009(10)SCC 84 has held that the courts have very wide discretion in the matter of amendment of pleadings. The first condition, which must be satisfied before the amendment can be allowed by the Court is whether such

Patna High Court CWJC No.6115 of 2016 (2) dt.27-07-2016 amendment is necessary for the determination of the real question in controversy. If that condition is not satisfied, the amendment cannot be allowed. This is the basic test which should govern the Courts' discretion in grant or refusal of the amendment. The other important condition which should govern the discretion of the Court is the potentiality of prejudice or injustice, which is likely to be caused to the other side. Ordinarily, if the other side is compensated by cost, there is no injustice.

5.

In view of the above settled proposition of law and in view of the fact that the suit is at a very initial stage, the learned court below has rightly exercised the jurisdiction under Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C. There is no question of prejudice to the petitioner arises. Thus this writ application is dismissed. (Mungeshwar Sahoo, J) brajesh/- U