← Library
Madras High CourtA/922/2013allowed

M.Dhanesh Mootha v. Madanraj Mootha

2016-10-06Honourable Mr Justice C.V. Karthikeyan3 pages

A. N o . 92 2 of 20 1 3 IN C. S . N o . 72 of 20 1 0 C. V . K A R T H I K E Y A N , J.

This application has been filed by the plaintiff seeking to amend the third prayer in the plaint by inserting the word "defendants 1 to 9" instead of defendants 1 & 2 in plaint prayer (3).

2 .

In the said application, notice has been ordered to all 122 respondents even though, the respondents 10 to 122 are not directly affected. 3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff states that the said amendment has been sought since it is a typographical error. At any rate, the plaintiff has to establish his case during trial and whether the defendants 1 and 2 alone are liable to render accounts or defendants 1 to 9 are liable to render accounts as given in prayer No. 3 can be decided only on appreciation of evidence. Consequently at this stage, this application is allowed.

C. V . K A R T H I K E Y A N , J.

vsg 4 .

Learned counsel appearing for the plaintiffs is directed to carry out necessary amendment in the cause title and in the plaint and to file the amended copy of the plaint on 08.11.2016.

5.

Office is directed to put a note regarding service of the individual defendants.

06.10.2016 vsg A. N o . 92 2 of 20 1 3 IN C. S . N o . 72 of 20 1 0