State Bank of India vs Shri Piara Singh and others

J.V. Gupta, J.—This petition is directed against the order of the trial court dated 14th March, 1986, whereby the application filed on behalf of the Plaintiff-bank for amendment of the plaint was dismissed.

By virtue of the amendment, the Plaintiff-bank wanted to implead the National Insurance Corporation, Dhangu Road, Pathankot, as Defendant No. 4 in the suit. As a matter of fact, this application was not contested on behalf of the Defendants nor they filed any reply thereto. The trial court dismissed the said application with the observations that there was no privity of contract between the Plaintiff-bank and the National Insurance Corporation so far as the liability of the Defendants with regard to the loan in question was concernd in the suit. It was also observed that the application was belated as it had been filed after one year when the case was fixed for the evidence of the defendants.

No one is present on behalf of the Defendants. As observed earlier, in the trial court also, the application was not contested on behalf of the Defendants nor did they file any reply to the application for amendment.

After hearing the learned Counsel for the Plaintiff-bank, I find that the amendment was necessary for deciding the real controversy between the parties, and the approach of the trial court in this behalf was wholly wrong and misconceived. The amendment sought for by the Plaintiff should have been allowed as the truck against which the loan was taken by the Defendants was insured with the National Insurance Corporation above-named. Consequently, the petition succeeds, the impugned order is set aside and the application for amendment of the plaint is allowed with no order as to costs. However, the evidence, if any, will be produced on behalf of the bank, on its own responsibility.