Court Allows Amendment of Plaint in Commercial Suit for Recovery of Loan, Subject to Costs.
27 February 2024
Civil Suits >> Civil & Consumer Law
The Plaintiffs' counsel, Mr. Mehta, argued that the amendments pertain to evidence already included in the case, such as documents demonstrating the Respondent’s admission of the debt. He further contended that, under the provisions of Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the trial had not commenced, as the Plaintiffs had not yet filed their affidavits in lieu of witness examination. Therefore, the amendments should be allowed in the interest of justice.
In response, the Respondent's counsel, Mr. Raheja, objected to the amendments, claiming that they were an attempt to delay the proceedings after the trial had commenced. He referred to an email in which the Plaintiffs indicated they would not lead oral evidence, suggesting the amendment was made to further postpone the trial.
The Court noted that the Plaintiffs had not filed affidavits for examination and had reserved the right to lead evidence later. Based on this, it found that the trial had not yet commenced. The Court emphasized the principle that amendments to pleadings should be allowed if necessary to determine the real issues in dispute, provided they do not introduce a new case. It further highlighted that the amendments sought did not alter the nature of the suit but only clarified existing claims.