ROYAL CALCUTTA TURF CLUB Vs. ASISH CHAKRABORTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendants in a suit for declaration and permanent injunction have preferred the instant revisional application. The reliefs claimed in the suit are as follows:

(2.) By the impugned order, the trial court allowed an application for amendment of the plaint after the commencement of trial and closure of the cross-examination of the Plaintiffs' Witness No.1 (P.W. 1).

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners argues that, by such amendment, the defendant/opposite party sought to bring in pleadings to cover up the lacunae of the plaintiff. Since the amendment was preferred at an advanced stage of the suit after the commencement of trial, the same was barred by the proviso to Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It is argued that, although it was mentioned in the amendment application that the proposed amendments were subsequent events, the second limb of the amendment, whereby the plaintiff/opposite party introduced his alleged monthly income at the time of termination of his service, which ought to have been well within the knowledge of the plaintiff even prior to the institution of the suit.