A civil revision petition filed under Order VI rule 17 seeking to amend the plaint does not dismiss the petition and the nature remains unaltered. This was upheld by the Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.D Jagadish Chandirawhere he said, “This Court is of the opinion that by amending the plaint, the nature of the suit will not be altered. However, the respondents/defendants have to be given an opportunity to file additional written statement” in Prabavathi V. R. Raghu [CRP(PD)No.3867 of 2016].
The brief facts of the case are, the plaintiff filed a suit to get a permanent injunction against the defendant to prevent him from interfering the plaintiff’s enjoyment and possession of the suit property. The defendants filed a counter suit claiming that the plaintiff had filed a vexatious suit to defeat the right of the defendants. At this stage, the plaintiff filed a petition seeking to amend the plaint stating that during the pendency of the suit, the defendants had trespassed into the property. However, the trial judge dismissed the petition on the ground of lack of evidence to support the trespass. Aggrieved by this, the petitioner filed a civil revision petition.
The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner can submit evidence in support of his claim of trespass and the trial judge had wrongly dismissed the petition and asks the court to set aside the order of the trial court and permit the petitioner to amend the plaint.
The counsel for the respondent submitted that the plaintiff has falsely accused the defendants of trespass and the order of the trial judge was right. They also claimed that the petition was an abuse of process of law to delay the proceedings. After listening to both the counsels, the learned judge decreed that, “The petition seeking to amend the plaint has been filed, even before the commencement of trial. The petitioner had paid necessary Court fee. Even if the petitioner had not been in possession earlier, when the suit for declaration has been filed, the consequential prayer would have to seek for recovery of possession. This Court is of the opinion that by amending the plaint, the nature of the suit will not be altered. However, the respondents/defendants have to be given an opportunity to file additional written statement and the petitioner/plaintiff is bound to prove that the respondents/defendants trespassed into the property on 08.05.2016 by letting in evidence” thus allowing the petition.
