RACHABATTUNI GOVINDA RAO Vs. JONNADULA SAMBASIVA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the defendant in O.S. No. 106 of 2002, on the file of the Court of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Tenali.

(2.) The respondent herein filed the suit for recovery of amount, on the strepgth of a promissory note, which is said to have been executed for a sum of Rs. 1,20,000/-. The petitioner admitted the execution of the p-omissory note, but pleaded in his written statement that he received only a sum of Rs. 20,000/- , and not Rs. 1,20,000/-. The trial of the suit commenced. The respondent filed an affidavit in lieu of chief-examination. During the course of cross-examination, it wa s elicited through him that the consideration for the promissory note was paid through a cheque, drawn on State Bank of Hyderabad. Certain suggestions were made to contradict this version. Therefore, the respondent felt the necessity to get the plaint amended, and he filed I.A. No. 1358 of 2003 to incorporate a statement to the effect that the consideration was paid through a cheque, dated 1-11-1999, drawn on State Bank of Hyderabad The application was resisted by the petitioner. The trial Court allowed the said I.A.

(3.) Sri J. Bhaskara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the amendment brings about an improvement in the plaint, as well as introduction of a new case. He submits that the respondent was not certain as to the nature of payment, and it is only after the written statement was filed and the evidence of P.W. 1 was concluded that the present I. A. was filed. He placed reliance upon Rule 17 of Order 6 C.P.C., as amended through the Civil Procedure Code Amendment Act, 2002, and submits that the application itself was not maintainable.