RATANKAR JADAVRAY DHOLAKIA Vs. TARUNKUMAR NAVINCHANDRA MAJETHIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition challenges the order of the trial court passed in Regular Civil Suit No. 264 of 2000 on application below Exh. 56 seeking amendment in the plaint under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(2.) THE petitioner is the original plaintiff who is the owner of the property. On account of devastating earthquake on 26th January 2001, office of the petitioner was materially damaged. It is the say of the petitioner that the suit shop on the ground floor and below the office of the petitioner also collapsed. In Special Civil Suit NO. 21 of 2004 instituted by the respondent herein against the petitioner and the government it was admitted by the respondent that suit shop does not exist for having been destroyed on account of earthquake. It is the say of the petitioner that application Exh. 56 was moved for amending the plaint of the Regular Civil Suit No. 264 of 2000 to avoid any future litigation and multiplicity of proceedings. However, by erroneous reasonings the Court denied such request and therefore this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) ORDINARILY the amendment in the plaint is to be allowed liberally as the objective is to minimise the litigation between the parties and also to effectively adjudicate controversy which is at large before the Court. In other words, all such amendments which are necessary for the purpose of determining the real questions in controversy between the parties can be allowed by the Court at any stage of proceedings. At pretrial stage, more liberal approach is expected from the Court and admittedly recordance of evidence has yet not begun in a regular civil Suit No. 264/2000.