- (1.) This revision has been filed by Shri Bansi Lal defendant against the dismissal of his application under Order 6 Rule 17, read with Section 51 of the Civil Procedure Code, for amendment of this written statement so as to take an additional plea that Sarvshri Satish Chand, Smt. Satya Devi, Mohinder Singh and Daulat Ram were necessary parties to the suit and without impleading them the suit was not maintainable and was liable to be dismissed.
(2.) The suit was filed by Sarvshri Jaikaran Dass and Daulat Ram sons of Salig Ram and Yog Ram plaintiffs against Sarvashri Bansi Lal and Sudharshan Dass defendants for possession of the land. In this case the issues had been framed and the plaintiff's evidence had concluded. It was only thereafter that the defendants came up with this application for amendment which was opposed by the plaintiffs on the ground that the persons named in the application were not necessary parties and that the application was mala fide.
(3.) The suit was filed for specific performance of the agreement, dated 17th January, 1960 with regard to the land measuring 8 kanals 2 marlas covered by khasra No. 630. Amendment of pleadings can be made with the permission of the Court by a party under the provisions of Rule 17 of Order 6 of the C.P.C which reads as:- "The Court may at any stage of the proceedings allow either party to alter or amend his pleadings in such manner and on such terms as may be just, and all such amendments shall be made as may be necessary for the purpose of determining the real question in controversy between the parties." From the rule, therefore, it would follow that it is the duty of the Court to allow amendment of pleadings when it is necessary for the purpose of determining the real question in controversy in the suit. The provisions of the Code allow a wide discretion to the Courts in the matter of amendment of pleadings. The main considerations to be borne in mind while allowing amendment of pleadings are the advancement of the interest of substantial justice and the avoidance of the multiplicity of litigation. Leave, however, to amend the pleadings ought to be refused only when the party applying has acted or by its mistake has done some injury to his opponent which cannot be compensated by an award of cost.;