GOA CANCER SOCIETY Vs. VITAL KAMAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD. Rule. With the consent of the learned Advocates for the parties rule made returnable forthwith and heard.

(2.) LEARNED Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the claim of salary arrears from March 1991 to August, 1999, which are sought to be added by way of amendment, would be barred by limitation except for three years prior to the filing of the said application since, if a fresh suit is filed for recovery of the said arrears, the suit for recovery of salary beyond 3 years would be barred by limitation. In support of his submission he places reliance on (Laxmidas Dayabhai Kabrawala v. Nanabhai Chunilal Kabrawala and others), A. I. R. 1964 S. C. 11 and on (M/s. Ganesh Trading Co. v. Moji Ram), 1978 (2) S. C. C. 91.

(3.) ON the other hand, learned Advocate for the respondent, after placing reliance on (Pirgonda Hongonda Patil v. Kalgonda Shidgonda Patil and others), A. I. R. 1957 S. C. 363 and on (Vineet Kumar v. Mangal Sain Wadhera), A. I. R. 1985 S. C. 817, has urged that neither any new case has been made out by way of amendment nor a totally new cause of action has been introduced, since the respondent in the suit had claimed salary upto the date of filing of the suit and the amendment application has been filed to claim the salary from the date of filing of the suit till August 1999.