ANJANI MAHATWAIN Vs. GOPAL MAHATO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners, who are defendants in Title (P) Suit No.69 of 2017/31 of 2008, are aggrieved of order dated 16.02.2018 by which amendment in the plaint has been permitted.

(2.) Contention raised on behalf of the petitioners is that after the suit has gone for trial amendment in the plaint cannot be permitted.

(3.) Order VI Rule 17 CPC which permits amendment in the pleadings at any stage of the proceedings is founded on the principles of equity, justice and good conscience. Order VI Rule 17 CPC provides that the court may permit either party to amend his pleadings at any stage of the proceedings, however, Rule 17 CPC itself puts a limitation on powers of the court to permit amendment in the pleadings. It provides that if amendment in the pleadings is necessary for the purpose of determining the real question in controversy between the parties, all amendments in the pleadings can be permitted on such terms as the court may deem just and proper. The proviso to Order VI Rule 17 CPC also carves out an exception. It provides that if inspite of due diligence the matter could not have been raised by the parties before the commencement of trial, amendment in the pleadings can be permitted. In "Salem Advocate Bar Association, T.N. Vs. Union of India, 2005 6 SCC 344", the scope of proviso to Order VI Rule 17 CPC has been discussed by the Supreme Court in the following words: