ALOKE CHAKRABORTY Vs. JIBAN CHAKRABORTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Dipjyoti Paul, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. S.M. Chakraborty, learned senior counsel for the respondents.

(2.) Reference is made to the order dtd. 14/12/2023 which reads as under:

(3.) Mr. S.M. Chakraborty, learned senior counsel for the rsepondents, submits that from a bare reading of the contents of the petition and the order dtd. 14/12/2023 passed by this Court on the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners, it appears that the grievance of the petitioners revolves around the non-awarding of reasonable cost while allowing the amendment application of the plaintiffs/respondents herein at a stage when the defence evidence was going to commence. The plaintiffs had in their amendment application volunteered to pay reasonable cost [Annexure-3]. Therefore, they are not averse to payment of any reasonable cost as this Court may deem fit, since the amendments allowed by the learned Trial Court by the impugned order are in furtherance of the principles guiding Order VI Rule 17 CPC in order to arrive at a complete adjudication of all the issues on facts on contest between the parties. If these two documents allowed to be adduced by the plaintiffs are material for the purposes of a proper adjudication, the approach of the learned Trial Court cannot be faulted under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as the Trial Court was well within the bounds of jurisdiction.