MATHURA PRASAD Vs. RAMGOVIND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner/plaintiff has tested the order dated 13.10.2011 passed by the Court below, whereby his application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC is rejected.

(2.) SHRI S.B.Mishra, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, criticized the order passed by the Court below on the ground that a perusal of the amendment application (Annexure P/2) clearly shows that a suit was decided on 31.3.2006 and on the basis of this subsequent decision which is a subsequent event the amendment was sought for. He submits that this amendment should have been dealt with leniently and should have been allowed.

(3.) A perusal of the amendment application (Annexure P/2) shows that the alleged subsequent event is of 31.3.2006. The application for amendment is filed on 15.9.11 i.e. after considerable long time. The Court below has rejected this application on the ground that the matter was remanded by first appellate Court on 22.7.2008 and thereafter also there was sufficient time with the petitioner to seek amendment. It was further held that the petitioner has not filed the application with 'due diligence'.