Gujarat High Court
Vels Aviation Services Ifsc Private ... vs Axia Aviation Limited on 21 June, 2024
Author: Sunita Agarwal
Bench: Sunita Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/8696/2024 ORDER DATED: 21/06/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8696 of 2024
==================================================
VELS AVIATION SERVICES IFSC PRIVATE LIMITED
Versus
AXIA AVIATION LIMITED & ANR.
==================================================
Appearance:
ANKIT N DIWANJEE(8683) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR BHARGAV HASURKAR(5640) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
==================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE
SUNITA AGARWAL
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI
Date : 21/06/2024
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA
AGARWAL)
[1]. The affidavit in compliance of the Order dated
20.06.2024 filed in the Court is taken on record.
[2]. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
perused the record.
[3]. The instant petition invoking supervisory
jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India has been filed challenging the
judgment and order dated 07.05.2022 passed by the
Principal Senior Civil Judge, Gandhinagar in the case of
AXIA AVIATION LIMITED VS VELS AVIATION
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/8696/2024 ORDER DATED: 21/06/2024
undefined
SERVICES IFSC PRIVATE LIMITED & ANOTHER in
Commercial Civil Suit No. 04 of 2022 to allow the
application at Exhibit - 61 under Order VI Rule 17 of the
Code of Civil Procedure for amendment of the plaint. The
amendments allowed by the Trial Court as also the relief
prayed in the plaint have been placed before us by the
learned counsel for the petitioner to assert that the
plaintiff though claimed relief of declaration of the Aircraft
Sale and Purchase Agreement dated 19.08.2021, entered
into between the plaintiff and the defendant, as void and
vitiate it on account of impossibilities / frustration of the
Sale Purchase Agreement. The consequential relief
including mandatory injunction for securing possession of
the aircraft, but no relief for damages for the loss of
business prospects has been prayed for.
[4]. The submission is that there is no whisper
in the entire original plaint as to any loss having been
suffered by the plaintiff on account of non-payment of sale
consideration under the Sale Purchase Agreement dated
19.08.2021.
[5]. By means of the proposed amendment, the
plaintiff sought to incorporate in the plaint the averments
with regard to the offers available to it for purchase of the
aircraft, received by the plaintiff by Letter of Intent dated
08.01.2022. The submission is that the Letter of Intent,
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/8696/2024 ORDER DATED: 21/06/2024
undefined
which is sought to be brought on record by means of
amendment, was very much available with the plaintiff at
the time of filing of the suit. The plaintiff consciously has
chosen not to make any such statement to lay the claim of
loss of business prospects in the original plaint. Rather,
the relief of mandatory injunction was sought for to
recover the possession of the aircraft, from the defendant.
[6]. The submission, thus, is that the reliefs
claimed by incorporation of Paragraphs '29 (h)' and '(i)'
are a result of afterthought and reliefs for such a huge
amount for the alleged loss of business prospects could
not have been skipped by the plaintiff, inadvertently. The
submission is that since there is no whisper in the entire
plaint about any offer for purchase of the aircraft after
execution of the Sale and Purchase Agreement dated
19.08.2021, it was not permissible for the trial Court to
allow the amendment application, holding that the
amendment would not change the nature of the suit.
[7]. It is vehemently argued that the entire
course of the suit would change due to incorporation of
the averments and the reliefs sought to be incorporated
by way of amendment. The amendments are hit by Order
VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the trial Court
has erred in allowing the same.
[8]. Dealing with these submissions, suffice it
to note that the claim for loss of business prospects
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/8696/2024 ORDER DATED: 21/06/2024
undefined
claimed by the plaintiff by way of amendment, arises out
of the allegations of non-performance of the Sale Purchase
Agreement, on the part of the defendant. The claim of the
plaintiff sought to be incorporated by way of amendment
was that because of non-performance of contract on the
part of the defendant, he has suffered huge losses, which
in our considered opinion is the basis of seeking reliefs of
declaration and mandatory injunction in the original plaint.
The claim of loss of business prospects having been arisen
out of the same contract and at present, only written
statement has been filed, we are of the opinion that any
issue with respect to the merits of the claim of the plaintiff
incorporated by way of amendment can very well be taken
care of by the trial Court.
[9]. The submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, as noted hereinabove, are only
on the aspect of the waiver on the part of the plaintiff, of
restricting its claim at the time of filing of the suit, which
cannot be the subject matter of consideration at the stage
of amendment.
[10]. The alternative relief sought to be
incorporated by way of amendment will not change the
nature of the suit, in any way, rather if all the pleas are
taken together and all reliefs are considered, it would
avoid multiplicity of the proceedings and bring the dispute
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/8696/2024 ORDER DATED: 21/06/2024
undefined
between the parties to its logical conclusion.
[11]. For the above, we do not find any infirmity
in the order of the trial Court so as to invoke our
extraordinary supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of
the Constitution of India. The petition is, DISMISSED,
accordingly.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ )
(PRANAV TRIVEDI,J)
SAHIL S. RANGER
