REVAJEETU BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS versus NARAYANASWAMY & SONS & OTHERS

REVAJEETU BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS versus NARAYANASWAMY & SONS & OTHERS

High Court correctly set aside the trial court's order allowing amendment, as the proposed amendment would introduce a new case not in the original plaint and adversely affect respondents’ rights, particularly as it was sought four years after suit institution. Amendment was not imperative for effective adjudication and would prejudice respondents; therefore, it cannot be permitted.

Parties
Appellant: Revajeetu Builders & Developers; Respondents: Narayanaswamy & Sons & Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
09 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Order Under Article 227 of Constitution
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Order VI Rule 17 CPC, Costs on Amendment Applications
Civil Procedure Amendment of Pleadings Order VI Rule 17 CPC Costs on Amendment Applications

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Revajeetu Builders & Developers

Appellant

Narayanaswamy & Sons & Others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Order Under Article 227 of Constitution

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether amendment of plaint introducing new cause of action years after suit institution can be allowed
  2. 2 Factors governing discretion of court to allow or refuse amendment under Order VI Rule 17 CPC
  3. 3 Principles for awarding costs on delayed amendment applications

Ratio Decidendi

High Court correctly set aside the trial court's order allowing amendment, as the proposed amendment would introduce a new case not in the original plaint and adversely affect respondents’ rights, particularly as it was sought four years after suit institution. Amendment was not imperative for effective adjudication and would prejudice respondents; therefore, it cannot be permitted.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Amendment application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC dismissed
  • Appellant to pay respondents Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) as costs for opposing amendment application before different courts