Gurinder Kaur v. Dilsher Singh And Others
-:1:-
! " !
!#$%%&'() *+ ' ,- $'% . '% '&*+
!$/+ 0$'1+'%*+
( 2 3 04 0
-
!
"
# $#$"
%& '() * + , - %- . )/+ * +* 00
1 2 3,, * 4 ,,
+ ,($5 $#$ .
6
7+ * , 861
$ 9
+ +
"
8 %* / (4 + * , )
/ $ % )
: + * '
0 * $;"
-:2:-
0 + / '""< 4=>* + :
0
*!
/+ . *
07 0
0 0
0
0
$;"
+ / '""< *
( !
+0
$;"
0 + / '""< 4 => *
!
*
. *
+ ;"
+0 0 >? * 7*$ 2
0 0* / '
""<6'""5* . + @ 0* >? @ 0 9
@
0 '""< *
0 0* $ 7 . + 0 / '""5 7 * . +
-:3:-
A7
!
/
0 . + + $;"
0 !
0 & & *
0 + / '""<'""5
0
0 + / '""< 0 8
+0 *
* * & 0 0 / '""<
0 0
0 0
!
*+* 00 :
0*
+ 0 !
+7
+ * , 0 < B + * ,
0 :* + + * +
* *
+0
0
7
!
+0 * , :
* +
0 +*
* *
0*
!
+
+
-:4:-
B
+0
'+:
# !
* , * + 0 /%50$'1+'%*+ 54'&+ 0$'1+ '% '&*+ 0 67 1 2 3,, , * 0 * 0 :
& + *
00 0
0 !
, * '
C!
*
+ 0 0+
+ 0
0 ++ *
0 : !
, 0
+* 00 0
+* 7 0 1 2 3,,*
'
C)8
.The court may at any stage of the proceedings allow either party to alter or amend his pleading in such manner and on such terms as may be just, and all such amendments shall be made as may be necessary for the purpose of determining the real questions in controversy between the parties:
-:5:-
Provided that no application for amendment shall be allowed after the trial has commenced, unless the court comes to the conclusion that in spite of due diligence, the party could not have raised the matter before the commencement of trialD $ >@+ 0, 3$9' '#& :& *$&'&9'%$54 0';5 $/%
$5* 3$$*% '% '&*+ - <)
$5$/7=)& *1 2 3,,
'
"70. ..... (ii) All amendments are to be allowed which are necessary for determining the real question in controversy provided it does not cause injustice or prejudice to the other side. This is mandatory, as is apparent from the use of the word "shall", in the latter part of Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC.
(iii) The prayer for amendment is to be allowed (i) if the amendment is required for e+ective and proper adjudication of the controversy between the parties, and (ii) to avoid multiplicity of proceedings, provided (a) the amendment does not result in injustice to the other side, (b) by the amendment, the parties seeking amendment does not seek to withdraw any clear admission made by the party which confers a right on the other side and
-:6:-
(c) the amendment does not raise a time barred claim, resulting in divesting of the other side of a valuable accrued right (in certain situations).
(iv) A prayer for amendment is generally required to be allowed unless (i) by the amendment, a time barred claim is sought to be introduced, in which case the fact that the claim would be time barred becomes a relevant factor for consideration, (ii) the amendment changes the nature of the suit, (iii) the prayer for amendment is mala-de, or (iv) by the amendment, the other side loses a valid defence.
(v) In dealing with a prayer for amendment of pleadings, the court should avoid a hypertechnical approach, and is ordinarily required to be liberal especially where the opposite party can be compensated by costs.
(vi) Where the amendment would enable the court to pin pointedly consider the dispute and would aid in rendering a more satisfactory decision, the prayer for amendment should be allowed.
(vii) Where the amendment merely sought to introduce an additional or a new approach without introducing a time barred cause of action, the amendment is liable to be allowed even after expiry of limitation.
-:7:-
(viii) Amendment may be justi-ably allowed where it is intended to rectify the absence of material particulars in the plaint.
(ix) Delay in applying for amendment alone is not a ground to disallow the prayer. Where the aspect of delay is arguable, the prayer for amendment could be allowed and the issue of limitation framed separately for decision. (x) Where the amendment changes the nature of the suit or the cause of action, so as to set up an entirely new case, foreign to the case set up in the plaint, the amendment must be disallowed. Where, however, the amendment sought is only with respect to the relief in the plaint, and is predicated on facts which are already pleaded in the plaint, ordinarily the amendment is required to be allowed.
(xi) Where the amendment is sought before commencement of trial, the court is required to be liberal in its approach. The court is required to bear in mind the fact that the opposite party would have a chance to meet the case set up in amendment. As such, where the amendment does not result in irreparable prejudice to the opposite party, or divest the opposite party of an advantage which it had secured as a result of an admission by the party seeking amendment, the amendment is required to be allowed. Equally, where the amendment is necessary for the court to e+ectively adjudicate on the
-:8:-
main issues in controversy between the parties, the amendment should be allowed. (See Vijay Gupta v. Gagninder Kr. Gandhi & Ors., 2022 SCC OnLine Del 1897)D "
0 & *+* ' $/>, %$'$* *$&'-& ?+:
54 +1>'!! ,3 770=))>@+ 0 , + * 0 '
"16. Insofar as the principles which govern the question of granting or disallowing amendments under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC (as it stood at the relevant time) are concerned, these are also well settled. Order 6 Rule 17 CPC postulates amendment of pleadings at any stage of the proceedings.
[AIR 1957 SC 363] which still holds the -eld, it was held that all amendments ought to be allowed which satisfy the two conditions: (a) of not working injustice to the other side, and (b) of being necessary for the purpose of determining the real questions in controversy between the parties. Amendments should be refused only where the other party cannot be placed in the same position as if the pleading had been originally correct, but the amendment would cause him an injury which could not be compensated in costs. (Also see
[(1990) 1 SCC 166] .)"
( !
++ * +>@+ 0,
4 4 ,/?+$5440 %+'%*+ :& *%$'6) 0== '
-:9:-
C9. By reason of the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1976, measures have been taken for early disposal of the suits. In furtherance of the aforementioned parliamentary object, further amendments were carried out in the years 1999 and 2002. With a view to put an end to the practice of -ling applications for amendments of pleadings belatedly, a proviso was added to Order 6 Rule 17 which reads as under: "17. Amendment of pleadings.The court may at any stage of the proceedings allow either party to alter or amend his pleading in such manner and on such terms as may be just, and all such amendments shall be made as may be necessary for the purpose of determining the real questions in controversy between the parties: Provided that no application for amendment shall be allowed after the trial has commenced, unless the court comes to the conclusion that in spite of due diligence, the party could not have raised the matter before the commencement of trial.D B 7 * 1 2 3,, + ,
+ + * 0 + *'
, 0
+ 0 0+ + ,,00 1 2 3,,+ 0
-:10:-
B* : >@+ 0 , 0**&9%+,
%+54'$&'&9'%$'% '&*+
:& *%$')))0 7-*
'
C< The purpose and object of Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code is to allow either party to alter or amend his pleadings in such manner and on such terms as may be just. Amendment cannot be claimed as a matter of right and under all circumstances, but the courts while deciding such prayers should not adopt a hypertechnical approach. Liberal approach should be the general rule, particularly in cases where the other side can be compensated with costs. Normally, amendments are allowed in the pleadings to avoid multiplicity of litigations.D ,0 0 0
* *
+
0 * 00 * 0 !
++
!
00 *
!
* , + 00
7 +*
9 0
& 0 + /
'""< ""5 + 0 00+ 0&'
0 0+
!
0 / '""<* * 0 ""5 ' / $23 + 0 *
0 ""5 +0 ""( / '"($* '"((
-:11:-
< B0 00 0 * * 0
+
9 0 * 00 0+
B & 0 B0
0
+ * ,
+ + 0 7
* B
+ 0
*
$# 0
) 4)4 ! :; F ;/ + F ;/