Rajasthan High Court: Dinesh Mehta, J. allowed a petition for correction and amendment of the plaint due to inadvertent errors.
In the present case, the application of the petitioner under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 had been rejected by the trial court, barring it under the limitation law. The petitioner, therefore, had approached the present bench for allowing the amendment of the plaint.
The Counsel representing the petitioner, AK Jain, has filed the application under Order VI Rule 17 and has submitted before the bench, that the trial court erred in rejecting the application as time-barred.
The High Court, upon perusal of the records, allowed the application to make changes to the plaint and stated that the order of the trial court was not in accordance with the law and in the interest of justice. The Court pointed out that the suit was pending since a long time and changes to the plaint would be innocuous, directing the petitioners to be allowed to make the changes upon payment of an amount of Rs 10, 000 to the respondents.[Mahaveer v. Dilip, 2019 SCC OnLine Raj 2720, decided on 03-09-2019]
