Amendement of plaint rejected = In our view, the Trial Court was right in rejecting the application. This we say for more than one reason. First, it was wholly belated; Second, respondent No.1(plaintiff) filed the application for amendment of the plaint when the trial in the suit was almost over and the case was fixed for final arguments; and Third, the suit could still be decided even without there being any necessity to seek any amendment in the plaint. In our view, 4 4 amendment in the plaint was not really required for determination of the issues in the suit.


Hon’ble Mr. Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre

NON­REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL No. 2012 OF 2019
(Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.1873 of 2012)
Vijay Hathising Shah & Anr. ….Appellant(s)
VERSUS
Gitaben Parshottamdas Mukhi & Ors. ….Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T
Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.

  1. Leave granted.
  2. This appeal is filed against the final judgment
    and order dated 08.01.2008 passed by the High
    Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Special Civil
    1 1
    Application No.6737 of 2007 whereby the High
    Court allowed the Special Civil Application filed by
    respondent No.1 herein and while setting aside the
    order dated 23.02.2007 of the Trial Court allowed
    the application for amendment of the plaint filed by
    respondent No.1 herein.
  3. The appeal involves a short point for its
    disposal as would be clear from the facts mentioned
    hereinbelow.
  4. The appellants are the proposed defendants
    whereas respondent No.1 is the plaintiff and other
    respondents are the defendants in Civil Suit
    No.6170 of 1990 pending in the City Civil Court,
    Ahmedabad.
  5. Respondent No.1 (plaintiff) has filed the suit
    for partition of the suit land and for consequential
    reliefs against the other respondents. In the said
    suit, respondent No.1 filed an application for
    2 2
    amendment of the plaint. The Trial Court by order
    dated 23.02.2007 rejected the said application.
  6. Respondent No.1 felt aggrieved by the
    rejection of her amendment application by the Trial
    Court and filed Special Civil Application
    No.6737/2007 in the High Court of Gujarat at
    Ahmedabad. By impugned order, the High Court
    allowed the Special Civil Application and while
    setting aside the order dated 23.02.2007 of the Trial
    Court allowed the amendment application giving
    rise to filing of this appeal by way of special leave in
    this Court by the proposed defendants.
  7. So, the short question, which arises for
    consideration in this appeal, is whether the High
    Court was justified in allowing the Special Civil
    Application filed by respondent No.1(plaintiff) and
    was, therefore, justified in allowing the amendment
    application.
    3 3
  8. Heard Mr. P.H. Parekh, learned senior counsel
    for the appellants and Mr. Priank Adhayarn, learned
    counsel for the respondents.
  9. Having heard the learned counsel for the
    parties and on perusal of the record of the case, we
    are inclined to allow the appeal and while setting
    aside the impugned order restore the order of the
    Trial Court and reject the application filed by
    respondent No.1 (plaintiff) for amendment of her
    plaint.
  10. In our view, the Trial Court was right in
    rejecting the application. This we say for more than
    one reason. First, it was wholly belated; Second,
    respondent No.1(plaintiff) filed the application for
    amendment of the plaint when the trial in the suit
    was almost over and the case was fixed for final
    arguments; and Third, the suit could still be
    decided even without there being any necessity to
    seek any amendment in the plaint. In our view,
    4 4
    amendment in the plaint was not really required for
    determination of the issues in the suit.
  11. It is for these reasons, the impugned order is
    legally unsustainable. The appeal thus succeeds
    and is accordingly allowed. The impugned order is
    set aside and the order dated 23.02.2007 of the
    Trial Court is restored.
  12. The Trial Court is directed to decide the civil
    suit within one month strictly in accordance with
    law.
    .……………………………………..J.
    [ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE] ……………………………………….J.
    [DINESH MAHESHWARI]
    New Delhi;
    February 25, 2019
    5 5