JAI BHAGWAN Vs. MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is surprising that the trial Court has passed the impugned order refusing a permission to amend the plaint only formally by correcting the name of the plaintiff, merely on the ground that the prayer for amendment had been made at somewhat belated stage. The law is well settled that an amendment of this nature, particularly an amendment which is merely a formality should be allowed to be made at any stage of the proceedings. A declaratory suit had been filed by Jai Bhagwan plaintiff-petitioner against the Municipal Committee, Patiala and another and the amendment which was required to be made is that Jai Bhagwan should be read as "Jai Bhagwan son of Dhani Ram alias Bansi Lal." The learned counsel for the petitioner had contended before the trial Court that the father's name of the petitioner had not been mentioned in an advertence but this did not prevail with the trial Court. The trial Court was also not justified in expressing any opinion in regard to the merits of the case by saying that the amendment prayed for was only for the purpose of wriggling out of an admission made by the petitioner in regard to the name of his father.

(2.) The learned counsel for the contesting respondent has reiterated the ground on which the amendment had been refused that the prayer for amendment had been made at a belated stage. This, as already observed is no ground to refuse the amendment.

(3.) The Revision Petition succeeds and the impugned order of the trial Court, dated November 2, 1977, is reversed. The petitioner is allowed to amend the plaint in terms of his prayer made in the application, dated July 22, 1977 filed under Order 6 rule 17, Code of Civil Procedure. There will be no order to costs.