K GANAPATHY Vs. SAKTHI SUGAR LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner/Defendant has preferred the present Civil Revision Petition as against the order dated 11.02.2010 in I.A.No.1213 of 2009 in O.S.No.207 of 2008 passed by the Learned Principal Sub Judge, Erode, in allowing the amendment application [filed under Order 6 Rule 17 of Civil Procedure Code praying permission of the Court to amend the Plaint].

(2.) THE Learned Principal Sub Judge, Erode, while passing the order in I.A.No.1213 of 2009 on 11.02.2010, has, inter alia, held that 'the Revision Petitioner/Respondent (Defendant) has violated the contract and it is not correct to state that separate suit has to be filed because of the reason that the right to claim damages in the plaint and to seek necessary amendment the Respondent/Plaintiff has got right' and viewed in that perspective, allowed the application without costs.

(3.) ADVANCING his arguments, the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner/Defendant submits that even on the date of filing of the suit by the Respondent/Plaintiff, the Petitioner/Defendant has harvested the sugarcane crop on 28.04.2008, but failed to take any steps to modify the relief and after 1 = years the present amendment to amend the plaint has been sought for, which is highly belated and the same is impermissible in law.