MODI RUBBERS LTD. Vs. MODIPON LTD. AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application has been made under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC for amendment of the suit. The plaintiff had filed this suit for declaration, permanent injunction and for recovery of money. When the suit was filed defendant M/s Modi Spinning and Weaving Mills Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'MSWL ') was a sick company within the meaning of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act and in view of Section 22(1) of SICA no substantial relief was claimed against the sick company and relief was claimed against earlier defendant No. 1, Punjab National Bank. During pendency of the suit, the status of MSWL changed and its petition to be declared as a sick company was dismissed and an appeal also got dismissed, with the result that plaintiff amended the suit and claimed substantial relief against MSWL also. However, subsequently plaintiff and earlier defendant No. 1 (PNB) jointly filed an application being IA No. 11604/2007 under Order 1 Rule 10(2) CPC for deletion of name of Punjab National Bank from the array of parties. This Court vide order dated 11th March 2008 allowed this application and deleted the name of Punjab National Bank from the array of parties and this Court also gave directions to the plaintiff to amend the plaint accordingly. The plaintiff has moved this application after deletion of the name of Punjab National Bank from the array of parties to renumber the defendants and to make necessary changes in the plaint in view of deletion of name of Punjab National Bank from the array of parties.

(2.) A perusal of amendments shows that plaintiff has not made any substantial change in the suit and has made only consequential amendment as a result of deletion Punjab National Bank as a party. The application has been opposed by defendant No. 1 i.e. M/s Modipon Ltd., defendant No. 2 M/s Modi Spinning and Weaving Mills Company Ltd. (MSWL) has not filed any reply to that application. As per defendant No. 1 the entire nature of the suit changes if this amendment is allowed. It is submitted that earlier no relief had been claimed against defendant No. 2 (now defendant No. 1 after deletion of PNB) and now the entire claim is made against defendants No. 1 & 2 and PNB has been let off. It is stated that the compromise arrived at between plaintiff and Punjab National Bank has not been disclosed to the defendant and defendant was not aware about any terms of compromise with Punjab National Bank. plaintiff could not have given up the relief against Punjab National Bank and could not have claimed substantial reliefs from other defendants.

(3.) THE basic relief claimed by the plaintiff is in respect of amount given to the defendants. Punjab National Bank was a guarantor, since the plaintiff has not pressed its claim against Punjab National Bank, plaintiff 's claims against other defendants cannot be defeated and plaintiff has a right to make necessary changes in the plaint. I, therefore, allow this application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC. Amended plaint is taken on record. WS to the amended plaint be filed within 04 weeks.