MEWA SINGH Vs. BRAHMA NAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a defendants' revision petition against the order passed by the lower appellate Court permitting the plaintiffs to amend their plaint under the provisions of Order 6, Rule 17, Code of Civil Procedure.

(2.) A preliminary objection has been raised by the learned counsel for the respondents that the petitioners are estopped from challenging the impugned order, because they had accepted the costs subject to the payment of which the amendment had been allowed. The learned Additional District Judge had permitted the plaintiffs to amend the plaint subject to the payment of Rs. 100/- as costs to the defendants. The costs were paid to the petitioners and accepted by them, and, therefore, they, according to the counsel for the respondents, could not question the said order.

(3.) AFTER hearing the counsel, I find that there is merit in this objection. It has been laid down in a number of authorities that after the acceptance of the costs without protest, a party is estopped from challenging the order. Reference in this connection may be made to a ruling by Bhide J. in Sohan Lal v. Dhari Mal Ishar das, AIR 1928 Lah 813 (2), where it was observed: