GOVINDA SHETTY Vs. DURGAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners herein are before this Court assailing the order dated 31.07.2013 passed in O.S. No. 6/1999. By the said order, the Court below has dismissed the application filed under Order V Rule 17 of CPC seeking amendment to the plaint.

(2.) THE petitioners herein are the plaintiffs in O.S. No. 6/1999. At the first instance, the suit had been disposed of, as against which an appeal was filed before this Court in RFA No. 731/2003 which was clubbed along with other appeals arising out of the companion suits. This Court by its judgment dated 04.02.2013 had set -aside the judgment and decree dated 19.04.2003 passed in O.S. No. 6/1999 as also passed in companion suits and had remitted the matter to the trial Court for fresh disposal by clubbing all the suits and recording common evidence by framing proper issues. Subsequent to the remand, the matter had been posted for evidence of the parties. At that stage, the plaintiffs filed the instant application under Order VI Rule 17 R/w. Section 151 of CPC seeking leave to amend the plaint. The application was opposed by the defendants. The trial Court after taking note of the rival contentions has dismissed the application. It is against the said order, the plaintiffs are before this Court.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners while assailing the said order would contend that the Court below was not justified in its conclusion that while remanding, the High Court had not permitted the plaintiffs to amend their pleadings. It is his contention that the remand was open ended and therefore when the trial Court was to reconsider the matter, all issues were required to be considered and appropriate decision was to be taken. It is to aid such decision, the pleading was required to be amended and appropriate issues were to be framed and thereafter parties were to go for trial. Hence, it is contended that the amendment is justified and the same is to be permitted.