Sahidullah Munshi, J. - (1.) This is an application filed by the plaintiff seeking amendment of the plaint. In the amendment application the plaintiff has stated that amendment of plaint is necessary in view of the issue no.(xvi) which has been framed by this Court to the effect whether the cheques issued by the plaintiff are for the price of the goods delivered by the defendant no.1. Paragraph 3 of the amendment application is set out below:- "3. That it has become much necessary to amend the plaint on the basis of issues framed particularly in view that the issue no.(xvi) has been framed that whether the cheques issued by the plaintiff for the price of the goods delivered by the defendant no.1."
(2.) In support of the prayer for amendment the plaintiff has also stated in paragraph 4 that plaintiff was the manufacturer and dealer of leather hand gloves prior to joining the defendant no.2 as partner of Aasha Kutir Shilpa on 18.09.2004 and she, as proprietress of Aasha Kutir Shilpa, is still manufacturer and dealer of leather hand gloves after retirement of the defendant no.2 as on 1st April, 2006 from the said M/s. Aasha Kutir Shilpa. The plaintiff has no experience at all in iron steel items and she never dealt with iron steel items in her lifetime, nor has she any trade licence and necessary documents to deal with iron steel items. Paragraph 4 is set out below:- "4. The plaintiff states that she was the manufacturer and dealer of Leather Hand Gloves prior to joining of the defendant no.2 as partner of Aasha Kutir Shilpa on 18.09.2004 and she as proprietress of Aasha Kutir Shilpa, is still manufacturer and dealer of Leather Hand Gloves after retirement of the defendant no.2 as on 01.04.2006 from said M/s. Aasha Kutir Shilpa. The plaintiff has no experience at all in Iron Steel items and she never dealt in Iron Steel items in her lifetime nor she has any Trade License and necessary documents to deal in with Iron Steel Items."
(3.) Before going into the scope of the amendment of the plaint it is profitable to discuss the plaint case first. It has been averred in the plaint that defendant no.1 is the proprietor of the business concern being M/s. Shiv Shakti Iron and Steel Company and father of the defendant no.2. The defendant no.2 is the Manager and looks after the business of defendant no.1. In paragraph 3 of the plaint it has been pleaded by the plaintiff that defendant no.2, as Manager of Shiv Shakti Iron and Steel Company, and defendant no.1, as proprietor of said Shiv Shakti Iron and Steel Company, were introduced to the plaintiff in the usual course of business by the husband of the plaintiff who happened to be a friend of defendant no.1. The defendant no.2 expressed his desire to join as a partner of the plaintiff's proprietorship business of Aasha Kutir Shilpa. On 18th September, 2004, the defendant no.2 joined as a partner of Aasha Kutir Shilpa and subsequently, the defendant no.1 approached the plaintiff for a loan and obtained diverse amounts as loan from the plaintiff totaling Rs. 18,65,625/- (Rupees Eighteen Lakh Sixty Five Thousand Six Hundred Twenty Five) only, in the name of said proprietorship business of the defendant no.1. The defendant no.1 took loan of Rs. 18,65,625/- on various dates between 11th July, 2005 and 30th August, 2005. It was verbally agreed that in the event of failure to repayment of the said loan by the defendant no.1 even after demand made by the plaintiff, he would repay the same together with interest @ 10% per annum. The defendant no.2 stood as guarantor in the said transaction and he promised to pay the said loan amount with interest. All the payments made by the plaintiff are in cheque, particulars of the cheques have been mentioned in paragraph 3 of the plaint. In paragraph 14 of the plaint it has been stated that cause of action for the suit arose on 11/07/2005, 13/07/2005, 16/08/2005 and 03/09/2005, when the loan totaling of Rs. 18,65,625/- was granted to Shiv Shakti Iron and Steel Company in instalments at the instance of the defendants and on 16/05/2008, when demand was made by the plaintiff for repayment of the said loan and lastly on 03/07/2008 when on behalf of M/s. Shiv Shakti Iron and Still Company, specifically when the defendants, acknowledged and admitted the debt of Rs. 18,65,625/- and requested for two years' time to enable them to repay the amount of Rs. 18,65,625/- to the plaintiff. According to the plaintiff, they have filed the suit during the period of three years and is not barred by law of limitation. Defendant is contesting the suit by filing written statement. In answer to the averment made in paragraph 3 of the plaint it has been categorically stated by the defendants that the plaintiff, after being introduced to the defendants, approached the defendant no.2 to join her sole proprietorship concern. Furthermore, the plaintiff had also approached the defendant no.2 to join the sole proprietorship concern of her son for expansion of both the business. On such invitation being made to join both the business the defendant no.2 accepted the same and by a Deed of Partnership dated 18th September, 2004, the defendant no.2 joined as a partner of M/s. Aasha Kutir Shilpa and by a Deed of Partnership dated 1st October, 2005, became a partner of M/s. Asta Vinayak Udyog. The business of M/s. Asta Vinayak Udyog did not even commence during the time when the defendant no.2 was a partner of the same. The defendants have denied that the defendant no.2 approached the plaintiff for a loan. It is the specific case made out by the defendant in paragraph 12 of the written statement that no cheques were drawn in favour of M/s. Shiv Shakti Iron and Steel Company Limited by the defendant no.2 as has been specifically mentioned in paragraph 3 of the plaint by the plaintiff. The defendant has stated in the written statement that the said cheques, if any, received by the defendant was on account of price of goods sold and delivered to the plaintiff by defendant no.1 in 2005 and all those cheques were issued in 2005 and no money suit in respect of the said cheques is maintainable in 2011. The defendant has relied on invoices for the goods delivered by M/s. Shiv Shakti Iron and Steel Company Limited to M/s. Aasha Kutir Shilpa. The said invoices have been annexed and marked as Exhibit 'E' to the written statement.;