Ravindra Automobiles, A ... vs Vinod S/O. Harishchandra ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 1854 Bom

 wp6881.15.J.odt                                                                                                 1/2



           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

                          WRIT PETITION NO.6881 OF 2015

           Ravindra Automobiles
           A proprietary firm,
           through power of attorney,
           Shri Aniiruddha s/o Ramkrushna Dhore,
           Aged 35 yrs., Occ: Business,
           R/o Arjuni Morgaon, Tah. Arjuni Morgaon,
           District Gondia.                   ....... PETITIONER

                                           ...V E R S U S...

 1]        Vinod s/o Harishchandra Chandewar,
           Aged Major yrs., Occ: Nil,
           R/o Arjuni Morgaon, Tah. Arjuni Morgaon,
           District Gondia.

 2]       Harishchandra Dharmaji Chandewar,
          Aged Major yrs., Occ: Nil,
          R/o Arjuni Morgaon, Tah. Arjuni Morgaon,
          District Gondia.                                   ....... RESPONDENTS
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Shri P.A. Gode, Advocate for Petitioner.
          Shri N.S. Bhattad, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      CORAM:  R.K. DESHPANDE, J. 

th APRIL, 2017.

                      DATE:      19


 ORAL JUDGMENT



 1]                   Rule,   made   returnable   forthwith.   Heard   finally   by

consent of the learned counsels appearing for the parties.

       wp6881.15.J.odt                                                                                                 2/2

  2]                       An application for amendment of plaint for correcting

the cheque number has been rejected by the Trial Court holding

that it changes the nature of suit. The reason cannot be accepted.

It is not known as to how, the nature of the suit changes, if certain

typographical error or inadvertent error is sought to be corrected,

that too before the commencement of trial. The order impugned

cannot be sustained. It has to be set aside and the application

needs to be allowed.

3] In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The order

dated 24.06.2015 passed below Exh.15 is hereby quashed and set

aside. The application at Exh.15 is allowed. Necessary amendment

be carried out within a period of two weeks from the date of first

appearance of the parties before it. No order as to costs.

JUDGE

NSN