S. KRISHNAN Vs. ARUNA AND ASSOCIATES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Civil Revision Petition is against an order of the learned City Civil Judge, who allowed an amendment of the plaint which amendment was under the following circumstances, as mentioned by the Court below:

(2.) MESSRS . Aruna and Associates was, originally a partnership firm. It is said to have been dissolved on 22nd February, 1972. In spite of such a dissolution having taken place and in spite of the fact that it is alleged that the petitioner who sought for an amendment in the lower Court professed that he became the sole proprietor of Messrs. Aruna and Associates, the suit was instituted on 27th April, 1974 in the name of the firm Messrs. Aruna and Associates but describing the same as a partnership firm carrying on business as Engineers and Contractors at Madras.

(3.) IT is seen, therefore, that by seeking for an amendment of the plaint, Mr. P. Balasubramanian wanted to get himself on record as the proprietor of Mrs. Aruna and Associates. This action was resisted by the petitioner -defendant on the ground that no such amendment can be sought 'for or allowed under Order 6, rule 17, Civil Procedure Code as it will totally change the cause of action and also on the ground that the suit as originally instituted was an incompetent one and such a suit which, cannot, be maintained cannot be sustained further by an amendment as asked for. The lower Court, however, accepted the plaintiff's contention that the amendment was possible and it allowed the application on costs. It is as against this, that the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed.