BANWARI LAL ASSOCIATION PVT LTD Vs. BASANTI DEVI FAMILY TRUST
LAWS(ALL)-2009-4-200
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on April 30,2009

BANWARI LAL ASSOCIATION PVT. LTD. Appellant
VERSUS
BASANTI DEVI FAMILY TRUST Respondents

JUDGEMENT

S.K.Gupta - (1.) THIS revision is directed against the order dated 25.3.2009, passed by Additional District Judge, Court No. 1, Ghaziabad in S.C.C. Suit No. 33 of 2004, Basanti Devi Family Trust and others v. Mahesh Chandra and others, whereby the amendment application (Paper No. 177C) for grant of mesne profit for the period from the institution of suit until the delivery of possession to the plaintiff @ Rs. 15,000 per month was allowed.
(2.) THE plaintiffs-respondents (respondents first set) hereinafter referred to as 'plaintiffs', filed S.C.C. Suit against the defendants-respondents (respondents second set) hereinafter referred to as respondents for the following reliefs :...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMMITED]... The plaintiffs subsequently filed an application for an amendment of the plaint under Order VI, Rule 17 of C.P.C, by adding the following prayer :...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMMITED]... The Additional District Judge, Court No. 1, Ghaziabad by its order dated 25.3.2009 allowed the application of the plaintiffs. Hence the present revision.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the revisionist has submitted that the court below has exceeded its jurisdiction by allowing the amendment which was otherwise barred by time. It has further been submitted by the learned counsel that the amendment ought not to be allowed under Order VI, Rule 17 of C.P.C. after the commencement of trial as the plaintiff was not diligent and could have raised the matter before the commencement of the trial. On the other hand learned counsel for the plaintiffs has submitted that the court below was fully justified in permitting the revisionist to incorporate further relief for the recovery of compensation/ mesne profit @ Rs. 15,000 per month from the date of the institution of the suit until the delivery of the possession to the plaintiffs, in view of the provisions of Order XX, Rule 12 of C.P.C. It has been further submitted by the learned counsel that the proviso of Order VI, Rule 17 is not applicable in the case, since the court below is fully empowered to allow the additional relief as provided under Order XX, Rule 12 of C.P.C.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.