SHAM NARAIN Vs. SURAJATALI MIDDEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff applied for an amendment of the plaint in O.S. No. 65 of 1968 to the District Munsif, Sompeta. But the application was dismissed by order dt. November 11, 1959. The revision petitioner questions the order rejecting the application for amendment.

(2.) The petitioner is a dealer in coconut and other commodities and in respect of the dealings carried on by the 2nd defendant as the agent of other defendants, a liability on such dealings has arisen to the tune of Rs. 3000/- On 31-3-1966, the amount outstanding due was found to be Rs.3000/-. The suit is laid for recovery of that amount from the defendants. The suit has been instituted by the sole plaintiff Sham Narain. Among other pleas, the defendants raised the contention that the suit is not maintainble because the plaintiff sued in his personal capacity, whereas in the notice that proceeded the suit, the claim was made on behalf of the firm called "Subcharam Sham Narain".

(3.) The application in question was presented by the plaintiff for an amendment of the cause title and for leave to describe the plaintiff as ''Subcharam Sham Narain".