Chhattisgarh High Court: A writ petition was allowed by a Single Judge Bench comprising of Goutam Bhaduri, J., setting aside the order of the trial court which dismissed petitioners’ application for amendment of the plaint.
The petition was filed against the order passed by the trial court whereby the amendment proposed by the petitioners-plaintiffs was dismissed on the ground that proposed amendment could not be allowed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the said order was cryptic and without any reason.
The High Court after considering the submissions made on behalf of the parties and the material available on record found that the defendants had amended their written statement and consequently, the plaintiffs also sought to amend their plaint. The trial Court dismissed the application of the plaintiffs by simply stating that the amendment could not be allowed. There was no justification or reason to disallow the amendment. The High Court observed that unless the mind of the Court is reflected in the order-sheet, justification for the same cannot be inferred. The Court was of the view that when amendment was allowed in the written statement by the defendants, the plaintiffs had a right to amend the plaint to rebut the same, otherwise the pleading of defence would remain unrebutted.
Consequently, the writ petition was allowed and the impugned order of the trial court was set aside. [Ramdhani Ram v. Kaleshwar Ram, 2018 SCC OnLine Chh 264, order dated 08.03.2018]