VEERAMMA ALIAS HEERA Vs. UGAPPA MADIVALA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard the learned Advocates on both sides on merits. Petitioners' learned Advocate submitted that it was because of the subsequent developments, namely, the alleged encroachment etc., that it became necessary to amend the plaint and ask for a subsidiary relief. Mr. Poojary, learned Advocate who represents Respondent No. 2 vehemently submitted that an amendment which changes the complexion of the original suit is not permissible and that the trial Court is fully justified in having rejected the application and that no interference is warranted.

(2.) THE legal position that emerges in this case is rather interesting because I have no hesitation in upholding the general principle which has been adverted to by Mr. Poojary, learned Advocate who represents Respondent 2, but these principles cannot be applied in a vacuum dehors the facts. In this case, if the amendment is to be refused it would mean that the Plaintiff must file a second suit that this additional litigation has been occasioned because of the wrongful acts that are attributed to the Defendants. This is not the scheme of the law and even in situations such as the present one where there is a degree of alteration to the complexion of the original litigation, it would be permissible provided it does not do a total and complete variance to the original structure of the plaint. To my mind, the Trial Court in these circumstances was in error in having refused the amendment. The amendment is accordingly allowed. The order passed by the Trial Court is set aside. The suit to proceed on merits. I need to however highlight the fact that I.A.VI which was an interim application alleging contempt has been adjourned to the hearing of the main suit which is absolutely wrong. If it is established that the party has breached the interim order, that is a serious offence and it is necessary that the trial Court must enquire into that limited aspect and pass appropriate orders on I.A.VI at this stage itself. With these directions the Civil Revision Petition which partially succeeds to stand disposed off. No order as to costs.