MAGANBHAI CHATURBHAI THAKAR Vs. RATHOD AMBALAL KALABHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) After filing of the suit, there was a settlement between the parties and there was change of circumstances and considering these facts, the plaint was required to be amended accordingly. As per the said agreement, the proceedings initiated by the plaintiff against the defendant and by the defendant against plaintiff were required to be withdrawn and the transaction was to be completed. It was, therefore, in the interest of justice to allow the said amendment and also to permit the amendment in the prayer clause, by which it was prayed that as per the novatio the Court has passed appropriate order in accordance with law by directing the parties to abide by the settlement arrived at between them. A similar application was made by the petitioner to amend written statement in Regular Civil Suit No. 641 of 1977, in which he was the defendant and present opponent was the plaintiff. The application was contested by the opposite parties, i.e. the opponent herein who was the defendant in Civil Suit No. 1173 of 1979 and plaintiff in Regular Civil Suit No. 641 of 1977. According to the trial Court, the present petitioner wanted to delay the proceedings and for that purpose the applications were made, which could not be termed as bona fide. The trial Court also observed that such amendment would change the nature of the controversy raised in the proceedings. It was also observed that if such amendment would be granted, it would prejudice the case of the present opponent.

(2.) In my opinion, in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties and novatio ought to have been entered into between them, allowing such application would be in the larger interest of all the parties, which would avoid multiplicity of proceedings....