AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Wallace, J.—The amendment of the plaint was called for because the basis of plaintiff''s right to sue had been jeopardized by a decision in
another suit that a similar endorsement on a similar promissory-note was a forgery. This decision was passed after the plaint in this suit was filed
and the application for amendment of the plaint was put in promptly. The amendment if allowed merely gives plaintiff another ""string to her bow"" in
respect of her claim that the original liability of defendant under the suit nota to Nagayya has now passed into a liability to herself. Defendant does
not seem to plead that he is not liable under the note, provided the suit is in time. In these circumstances the ruling in Naba Kumar Chowdhury Vs.
Higheazany, cited by the lower Court is in point and the amendment doss not affect defendant''s liability to pay though there is a change in the
manner in which plaintiff claims the debt.
In the circumstances I am not prepared to hold that the lower Court has acted without jurisdiction or has exercised its jurisdiction irregularly in
allowing the amendment.
The petition is dismissed with costs.