SITA DEVI Vs. NITIN GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present revision petition has been preferred against the order dated 19. 2. 2000 in the civil suit No. 45/99 passed by Additional District Judge No. 1, Jaipur City, Jaipur whereby the application of plaintiff for amendment in plaint filed under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC has been dismissed mainly on the ground that the amendment will amount to inconsistent plea, nor it would be relevant for the purpose of deciding the controversy in suit and that the amendment will change the nature of the suit.

(2.) COUNSEL for petitioner submits that in the facts mentioned in the plaint in regard to dispute about the property neither it changes the nature of the suit, nor it is inconsistent with the pleading or at the most even the amendment is allowed it will amount to alternative plea.

(3.) COUNSEL for respondent relied on the judgment in case of M/s. Modi Spinning & Weaving Mills Co. Ltd. and another Vs. M/s. Ladha Ram & Co. (3), wherein it was held that inconsistent and alternative pleading can be made in pleadings but seeking amendment to displace the plaintiff from the admissions made by defendant in written statement is not permissible.