Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The amendments were imperative for the proper and effective adjudication of the dispute; refusal to allow the amendment application would have caused injustice or resulted in multiple litigations; and the amendments did not constitutionally or fundamentally change the nature of the case.
The Court stated that if the amendment was not allowed it would lead to unnecessary multiplicity of litigation, as the amendments appeared to be necessary to determine the real controversy between the parties.
“In the light of law laid down by the Courts, change of counsel cannot be a ground to file amendment application bypassing the rigorous conditions of due diligence. In fact, to meet out any mistake, no advantage can be given to litigant due to change of counsel.”
“The suit was instituted in 1996 and was at the fag end of the trial. The Defendant’s cross-examination was ongoing and if the proposed amendment is allowed, it will change the nature and character of the suit.”
Bombay High Court: Milind N. Jadhav, J., addressed a matter with regard to the amendment of pleadings. Petitioners have submitted that they