Order VI Rule 17 of CPC | Upto What Stage Amendment Application May be Allowed & What would be the Effect of delay? Explains Allahabad HC – Law…

The Allahabad HC on Thursday ruled that, when an amendment application is filed at a very belated stage, it is required to be seen as to whether it has been filed with clean hands, bonafide intention or only with the intention to delay the proceedings and if the second one is found, no interference is required.

The bench of Justice Neeraj Tiwari stated that petitioner himself has filed writ petitions for early disposal of suit and on the other hand, he has taken chance to linger on the proceeding by filing amendment application at a very belated stage.

In this case, the petitioner has filed an Original Suit along with an interim injunction application in the year 1993 for the cancellation of the sale deed, which was rejected. Against the said rejection order, the petitioner preferred an Appeal.

During the pendency of the appeal, the petitioner filed an amendment application for amending the plaint. The said appeal as well as the amendment application was rejected. Again, both orders petitioner filed Writ Petition which was rejected.

Dharmendra Kumar Tripathi, Counsel for the petitioner submitted that, while rejecting the amendment application, it is required on the part of the Court below to see as to whether it is filed with ill intention or with clean hands.

Shobhit Saxena, Counsel for the respondent submitted that the intention of this Court was very much clear that the suit has to be decided at the earliest, but without any reason, after a delay of more than three years, the petitioner has filed an amendment application again.

The issue for consideration before the bench was:

Whether in light of Order VI Rule, 17 of CPC, up to what stage, amendment application may be allowed and what would be the consequences of delay in filing of amendment application?

Join LAW TREND WhatsAPP Group for Legal News Updates-Click to Join

High Court after relying upon the case of B K Mittal vs. Sakya Centre Society and others stated that the Apex Court has taken a consistent view that amendment application may be allowed at the second appellate stage, Court is required to take a liberal view and further amendment application would not be rejected on the ground of delay, in case delay is bonafide without any ill intention.

High Court opined that once the Court has granted liberty to file a second amendment application, there is no occasion for the petitioner to wait for three years when the suit was listed for final hearing. In fact, it is nothing but an attempt to linger on the proceeding by filing such an amendment application.

The bench stated that the petitioner himself has filed writ petitions for early disposal of suit and on the other hand, he has taken chance to linger on the proceeding by filing amendment application at a very belated stage. Therefore, while dealing with such a situation where an amendment application is filed at a very belated stage, it is required to be seen as to whether it has been filed with clean hands, bonafide intention or only with the intention to delay the proceedings and if the second one is found, no interference is required.

In view of the above, High Court dismissed the petition.

Case Title: Braj Bhushan Lal Awasthi v. Smt. Urmila (Since Deceased) And 11 Others

Bench: Justice Neeraj Tiwari

Citation: MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. 115 of 2022

Read the original here:
Order VI Rule 17 of CPC | Upto What Stage Amendment Application May be Allowed & What would be the Effect of delay? Explains Allahabad HC - Law...