NAHAR SILK LIMITED Vs. SUCHETA JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 2-6-1995, by which the learned Civil Judge dismissed the petitioner's application one under Order VI Rule 17 Civil Procedure Code for amendment of the plaint and second application under Order 1 Rule 10 Civil Procedure Code for deletion of petitioner No.2 from the array of defendants in Suit titled Sucheta Jain Vs. Nahar Silk Mills And Another.

(2.) As regards the amendment application under Order VI Rule 17 Civil Procedure Code, it is the petitioner's submission that had the Court permitted production of letter dated 12-1-1993, there would have been no necessity to move the application, since the basic plea of novation was also there in the written statement. The sole purpose of the amendment is to plead and bring on record the letter dated 12-1-1993. Vide a separate detailed order, the revision petition bearing No. 631 of 1995 challenging the order rejecting the petitioner's application under Order XVIII Rule 17 A Civil Procedure Code for being permitted to produce the letter of 12-l-1993, has been dismissed.

(3.) The amendment application accordingly must also fail as it would serve no purpoose. The plaintiff cannot be permitted to bring on record and prove the letter by amending the written statement, once the application under Order XVIII Rule 17 A Civil Procedure Code has been dismissed.