HARISH GOPAL Vs. CASTROL INDIA LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present civil revision petition is filed against an order made in C.M.P.No.888 of 2011 in A.S.No.517 of 2009 on the file of the III Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai dismissing the application filed under Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C. seeking to amend the plaint.

(2.) THE petitioner as the plaintiff filed O.S.No.6345 of 2000 on the file of the City Civil Court, Chennai against the respondent herein for declaration to declare the resignation letter dated 15.02.1999 obtained by the defendant from the plaintiff as null and void.

(3.) THE said suit was contested by the respondent by filing a written statement. The trial court by judgment and decree dated 31.07.2009 dismissed the suit on merits by holding that the plaintiff had miserably failed to prove that he was unduly influenced to give a resignation letter. It was also observed by the trial court that based on a blanket pleading that the resignation letter was obtained under undue influence, the plaintiff cannot seek for any relief. Aggrieved over the judgment and decree of the trial court, the plaintiff filed an appeal in A.S.No.517/2009. During the pendency of the above appeal, the plaintiff/petitioner herein filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C. to amend the plaint so as to include the consequential relief of reinstatement in service with full backwages. The said application was resisted by the respondent by filing a counter. The court below rejected the said application on the ground that the plaintiff is not entitled to seek for amendment of the plaint after the commencement of trial in view of the proviso introduced under Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C. by way of amendment made in the year 2002. It is also observed by the lower court that the petitioner is seeking for amendment after the lapse of nearly 11 years. Thus, the aggrieved plaintiff is before this Court by filing the above civil revision petition.