Jai Krishna Yadav And Ors vs Anmol Yadav And Ors

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated dated 01.02.2019 passed by the learned Additional Munsif 1st, Araria in Title Suit No. 12151 of 1964 whereby the petition under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short 'CPC') filed by the petitioners for certain amendments in the plaint has been rejected.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the amendment sought for are formal in nature and they do not change the nature of the suit. The proposed amendments are necessary for just decision of the case. The court below ought to have appreciated that the amendments sought for were necessary to avoid multiplicity of litigation. He pleaded that the court below has been vested with the power to allow amendment in plaint, but it has refused to exercise its jurisdiction and has mechanically dismissed the application filed under Order 6 Rule 17 of the CPC.

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the order impugned as also the amendment petition filed under Order 6 Rule 17 of the CPC, I find that a vague prayer was made by the petitioners seeking amendment in the plaint. It is not mentioned as to how the proposed amendments sought for by the petitioners were necessary for the purpose of determining the real questions in controversy between the parties.

On query, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly stated that he is not aware as to the whether the trial has commenced or not. There is no such pleading in the application filed under Order 6 Rule 17 of the CPC.

Under the circumstances, if the court below has held that the plaintiff is not clear in the petition of amendment in the suit and not clear for cause of action in the petition, no illegality can be found with the order impugned. The court below has rightly refused the prayer made by the petitioner as the suit is quite old.

It is true that the court has jurisdiction to allow amendment of pleadings. However, before allowing the same, pre-condition is that the same may be necessary for the purpose of determining the real questions of controversies between the parties. In absence of any pleading in this regard, I am of the opinion that no interference is warranted in the order passed by the court below.

Accordingly, the application is dismissed.