FAKIR BHAGVANBHAI SOLANKI Vs. DAHYABHAI LALLUBHAI UMARVANSHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dtd. 15/5/2018 passed by the Principal Civil Judge, Palsana at Surat in Regular Civil Suit No.34 of 2017 by which the learned trial Court rejected the application Exh-20 and refused to amend the pleadings as prayed for.

(2.) Heard Mr.S.J. Nayak, learned advocate for Mr.N.K. Majmudar, learned advocate for the petitioner. Though called out, none appeared for and on behalf of the respondents.

(3.) Having heard learned advocate for the petitioner and having considered the application Exh-20 as well as on perusal of the impugned order, it appears that, the amendment as sought, is technical in nature and in that circumstances, the Court ought not to have rejected the application. The trial Court overlooked the facts that the nature of the proposed amendment is general in nature and due to inadvertence, the prayer for interest having not been pleaded in the plaint. The Apex Court in the case of Varun Pahwa Vs. Renu Chaudhary (AIR 2019 SC 1186), while dealing with the same issue, held that general mistake, negligence, inadvertence in pleadings cannot change the nature and character of the suit.