JAI SINGH DAHIYA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been preferred against the order dated 16.12.2015 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Kaithal in Civil Appeal no. 23/2015, titled as 'Jai Singh Dahiya Vs. State of Haryana and others' , whereby the application filed by the petitioner for amendment of the plaint has been dismissed.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner-plaintiff only wants to add the relief to claim the interest on the delayed payments and that will not change the nature of the suit nor will require any fresh evidence. The interest was very much claimed in the legal notice served upon the respondents. But, due to some inadvertent mistake, the said relief could not be claimed in the plaint.

(3.) On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents contended that the application for amendment of the plaint has been moved by the petitioner at the appellate stage. No such plea was raised in the plaint and even no application was moved by the petitioner during the pendency of the suit. Thus, he contended that in view of proviso to Order 6, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short CPC), the application for amendment cannot be entertained.