Aruna Garg vs Rakesh Chawla And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 1926 P&H

                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

                            287                                           CR No.4323 of 2019
                                                                          Date of Decision : 30.1.2023


                            Aruna Garg                                                         ....Petitioner

                                                               VERSUS

                            Rakesh Chawla and Others                                        ....Respondents

                            CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN

                            Present :    Mr. P.K.S. Phoolka, Advocate for the petitioner.

                                         None for respondent no.2.

                                         Mr. Akshay Jain, Advocate for respondent nos.1, 3, 4 to 8.



                            ALKA SARIN, J. (Oral)

The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of

the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 17.05.2019 whereby

the application filed by the plaintiff-petitioner for amendment of the plaint

has been dismissed.

Learned counsel for the plaintiff-petitioner would contend that

the suit was filed for damages on account of defamation, physical and

mental harassment and agony as well as financial loss caused by the

defendant-respondents to the plaintiff-petitioner. It is further the contention

that at the time of filing of the plaint it was inadvertently left out that the

damages were being sought along with 18% interest per annum from the

date of filing of the suit till the date of realization. Learned counsel for the

plaintiff-petitioner has further pointed out that the application for

amendment of the plaint was filed at the stage when the evidence of the

plaintiff-petitioner had not even commenced. Learned counsel for the

plaintiff-petitioner would further contend that the amendment would not JITENDER KUMAR 2023.01.31 09:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

Chandigarh

change the nature of the suit in any manner nor any prejudice would be

caused to the defendant-respondents.

Per contra learned counsel for the respondent nos.1, 3, 4 to 8

has contended that a well reasoned order has been passed by the Trial Court

and that the application has rightly been dismissed.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

In the present case the only amendment sought is to add the

lines "along with 18% interest per annum from the date of filing of the suit

till the date of realization" in the head-note and prayer clause of the plaint.

The nature of the suit does not change in any manner. The application has

been filed at the stage when the evidence of the plaintiff-petitioner is yet to

commence. Learned counsel for the respondents has not been able to show

how the said amendment, if allowed, would cause prejudice to the

defendant-respondents.

In view of the above, the present revision petition is allowed.

The impugned order dated 17.05.2019 (Annexure P-1) is set aside and

consequently, the application (Annexure P-3) filed by the plaintiff-petitioner

for amendment of the plaint stands allowed. Pending applications, if any,

also stand disposed off.

Whether reportable: YES/NO

JITENDER KUMAR 2023.01.31 09:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

Chandigarh