SANKARAN KESAVAN Vs. SANKARAN BHARATHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the order of the Court below dismissing an application for amendment of the plaint. That application was accompanied by an affidavit which stated the reasons for the amendment and stated further generally the matters to be introduced by the amendment. In the prayer what was stated was that the amendment has to be made "{]IrXm\pkcWw'', which the court below construed as meaning such amendment as may be suited to the occasion. In the view of the court below the duty to decide whether a particular amendment is suited to the occasion or not was not cast upon the court and for that reason it thought that there was no bona fides in the petition and rejected it.

(2.) The application in this case was not in proper form. An application for amendment of pleading must state precisely the specific words, clauses or sentences to be added if the prayer is for addition and the precise place in the original pleading where those are to be inserted. If the amendment sought is for deletion of any part of the original pleading the details thereof must also be given with precision, even so, if the amendment is for alteration of the original pleadings whatever be the matter of amendment. Whether by addition, alteration or substitution, that must be clearly and precisely indicated as in the case of amendment of a statute and then if the amendment is allowed the courts will see that the amendment is carried out in the original pleading in a manner to be distinctly noticeable, with the authority under which the amendment is made, that is to say, the order of the Court pursuant to which the amendment is made. An application which is not in the above form cannot be accepted or allowed. The Court below cannot take upon itself the responsibility of deciding whether an amendment is suited to the occasion, as the court below says, or where a particular amendment is sought to be inserted. All these are for the party to decide and a request if properly made, will be considered.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks justification for the form of the petition for amendment by saying that that is the practice that has been prevailing, that is to say, that the amendment need not be inserted as to be made in the original pleading in a particular manner as aforesaid but that it is enough to indicate in a general way the amendment required and on that application being allowed the party will present a new pleading whether plaint or written statement, incorporating the amendments sought to be made. There is no sanction of law for substituting one pleading by another. When a plaint or written statement is once presented to court it will be the pleading and continue to be the pleading. Any amendment that is sought and allowed will be carried out in that paper, that is the original pleading and no fresh pleading in substitution of the one already filed can be permitted. I am not aware of the prevalence of such a practice as stated but if it prevails, I am clear that it has not got the sanction or support of the Law and such a practice shall prevail no more. The petitioner's learned Counsel assures me that the form in which the present application is filed in the form in which it used to be presented. I, therefore, consider it that he should be given an opportunity of presenting an application for amendment in the appropriate form as indicated above. While therefore, allowing the revision and setting aside the order of the lower court, I direct the petitioner to present an application in the proper form in the court below which will be considered as presented at the time when the one under consideration now was presented, and dealt with on that basis. The petitioner should present such an application within two weeks from this date on default of which the order passed by the court below will stand confirmed. Should such an application be presented the court below will consider it upon merits and dispose of it according to law. There will be no order for costs.