ALLAHABAD BANK Vs. HINDUSTHAN YARN TWISTING CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the impugned Order No.19 dated 31.8.1998 the Forum was pleased to allow the application of the opposite party for amendment of their written version in part. It is accepted that there were as many as eight clauses in the said petition for amendment of the version out of which seven paragraphs were allowed to be incorporated by way of amendment but the Paragraph No.24g was not allowed to be incorporated in the written version. The rejection of this prayer of the opposite party for incorporation of the Paragraph 24g has given rise to this present petition. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the Forum has pre-judged the matter by not allowing the amendment sought for and in its hurry disallowed the claim for amendment by way of incorporating of this paragraph. Learned Counsel has referred to several decisions of the Hon'ble Court and of the Apex Court to contend that amendment of the written statement would be granted liberally. Consequently, he submits that the Forum had fallen in error in rejecting addition of Paragraph 24g. Learned Counsel for the opposite party submits that the case is of the year 1997 and the opposite parties have all along tried to delay the hearing of this case. It appears that the complainant denied the existence of the document dated 13.3.1997 and it was their specific allegation that it has been created for the purpose of the present litigation. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that this is not the stage to arrive at such a conclusion whether the document sought to be introduced is a manufactured one or not. According to him, the sole point for decision would be whether the amendment sought for can be allowed or not We have considered the respective submissions of the learned Counsels for the parties and we think that the amendment sought for should have been allowed by the Forum. Accordingly, we allow this revision petition and direct the Forum to allow the amendment sought for in regard to incorporating Paragraph 24g of the amendment petition. Learned Counsel for the complainant submits that exemplary cost should be granted for moving the petition for amendment at a belated stage. It appears that no such order for payment of cost was passed by the Forum. We are also not inclined to grant any cost for this amendment.

(2.) The revision petition is accordingly allowed, and the amendment sought for incorporating Paragraph 24g is also allowed.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the complainant submits that a direction should be issued to the Forum for early disposal of the case. It is expected that the Forum shall try to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible and both parties are directed to co-operate with the Forum in the matter of early disposal of the case. With this observation, the revision petition is disposed of. Revision Petition allowed.