The Jammu & Kashmir High Court opined that the approach differs when it comes to the amendments to the plaint. While considering amendments to the written statement, the general principle is to allow the application even if new grounds are added, substituted, or altered.
However, the same cannot be applied in the case of a plaint. A new cause of action is added, substituted, or altered in a plaint that is objectionable.
The bench opined that inconsistent pleas and subsequent events can be allowed by way of amendment, however when the total cause of action is being changed, the same cannot be permitted.
Brief Facts:
The Petitioner has challenged an order vide which the application filed by him to seek amendment of the plaint was dismissed.
Background of the Case:
The Petitioner had filed a suit for declaration and partition regarding a property against the Respondents. The case of the Petitioner was that the cousin brother of the Petitioner and co-owner passed away unmarried and issueless. The deceased brother was the owner of the suit property which was inherited from his father being the only son. It was contended that the Petitioner entered the possession of the suit property that belonged to the cousin brother and made significant improvements to it. The Petitioner contended that since parties are governed under Muslim Personal Law, the Petitioner and the Respondents are entitled to inherit one-half share each from the property left by the deceased. The Respondents managed to get an adoption deed per which it was claimed that the deceased had adopted Respondent No.1. The Petitioner contended that the adoption deed was void and null.
During the pendency of the proceedings, Petitioner filed an application seeking amendment of the plaint. By way of amendment, the Petitioner claimed that he is the exclusive owner of the suit property and sought a permanent injunction against the Defendants. The Petitioner by way of amendment in the plaint also contended the whole suit property.
The said application was dismissed because the amendment is insignificant for adjudication of the matter pending before the Court and if the amendment is allowed, it would cause irreparable loss to the Defendants.
Observations of the Court:
It was observed by the Court that the pleadings can be amended at any stage and if such amendments are necessary for determining the real controversy, then the same must be allowed.
The High Court opined that in terms of allowing the application seeking amendments to the pleadings, the Courts must adopt a liberal approach. However, the approach differs when it comes to the amendments to the plaint. While considering amendments to the written statement, the general principle is to allow the application even if new grounds are added, substituted, or altered. However, the same cannot be applied in the case of a plaint. A new cause of action is added, substituted, or altered in a plaint that is objectionable.
In the present case, the original case of the Petitioner was that he is the owner of one-half of the property. By way of amendment, the Petitioner contended that he would be the lone legal heir of the property which is contradictory to the previous pleading. The Petitioner by way of amendment was trying to change the nature of the suit.
The Bench opined that inconsistent pleas and subsequent events can be allowed by way of amendment, however when the total cause of action is being changed, the same cannot be permitted.
The decision of the Court:
Therefore, noting that the amendment if allowed would change the cause of action and nature of the suit, the High Court dismissed the petition and upheld the order passed by the Trial Court
Case Title: Abdul Aziz Bhat v. Mohammad Iqbal Bhat & Ors.
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Dhar
Case No.: OWP No. 1353/2011
Advocate for Petitioner: Adv. Mr. Rizwan-ul-Zaman Bhat
Advocate for Respondent: Adv. Mr. Mubashir Gatoo
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
