K G VENKATARAMAN Vs. T SRIDEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner herein is the defendant.

(2.) THE respondent herein filed a suit for recovery of the money on the basis of a promissory note executed by the petitioner. THE petitioner filed a written statement denying both execution of the promissory note and borrowing of any sum from the respondent. In the suit, trial commenced and P.W.1 was examined in chief and cross. THEreafter, the respondent filed an application to amend the date of the promissory note as 1.10.1996, as it was wrongly mentioned in the plaint that the date of the promissory note was 12.10.1996. Opposing this application, the petitioner filed a counter. However, the trial Court allowed the application for amendment. Hence, this Civil Revision Petition.

(3.) THESE are all the guidelines, which have been incorporated in the following decisions: 1) Sant Ram Agarwal v. Civil Judge, Mohanlal Ganj A.I.R. 1994 Allahabad 99); 2) Ganeshi Rai v. I Additional District Judge, Ghazipur (A.I.R. 1992 Allahabad 25); 3) Lucy Narona v. Raghunath Jew Bije (A.I.R. 1993 Orissa 153); 4) Ganesh Trading Co. v. Moji Ram (A.I.R. 1978 S.C. 484) = (1978) 91 L.W. 29 S.N.; 5) Shanabhai Mangalbhai Patel v. Bhagavanbhai (A.I.R. 1990 Gujarat 74); 6) B.K. Narayana Pillai v. Parameswaran Pillai (2000 (1) S.C.C. 712).