Source: Madhya Pradesh High Court

Why in News?

Recently, the Madhya Pradesh High Court in the matter of Prakash Kodwani v. Smt. Vimla Devi Lakhwani & Ors., has held that as per the provisions of Rule 17 of Order VI of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC), only pleadings proposed should be considered in the amendment application and not the merits of the proposed amendment.

What was the Background of Prakash Kodwani v. Smt. Vimla Devi Lakhwani & Ors. Case?

• In this case, the petitioner has preferred the present petition before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh challenging the order passed by Civil Judge, Junior Division, District Indore.
• In the Order, the Trial Court rejected the application under Rule 17 of Order VI of CPC preferred by the petitioner seeking leave to amend the written statement has been rejected.
• Setting aside the order of the Trial Court, the High Court allowed the petition.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• The single judge bench of Justice Pranay Verma observed that it is well settled in law that while considering an application for amendment it is only the pleading which is proposed which is required to be taken into consideration and the merits of the proposed amendment are not to be seen.
• It was further added that the Court found it just and necessary to allow the amendment application earlier dismissed by the civil judge.

What is Rule 17 of Order VI of CPC?

Order VI of CPC

About:

• Order VI of CPC deals with pleading in general.
• Pleading shall mean plaint or written statement.

Pleadings:

• Pleadings are statements in writing delivered by each party alternately to his opponent, stating what his contentions will be at the trial, giving all such details as his opponent needs to know in order to prepare his case in answer.
• It is an essential requirement of pleading that material fact and necessary particulars must be stated in the pleadings and the decisions cannot be based on the grounds outside the pleadings.

Rule 17:

• This rule deals with the amendment of pleadings.
• It states that the Court may at any stage of the proceedings allow either party to alter or amend his pleadings in such manner and on such terms as may be just, and all such amendments shall be made as may be necessary for the purpose of determining the real questions in controversy between the parties.
• Provided that no application for amendment shall be allowed after the trial has commenced, unless the Court comes to the conclusion that in spite of due diligence, the party could not have raised the matter before the commencement of trial
• The object of Rule 17 is to minimize the litigation, minimize the delay and to avoid multiplicity of suits.