Order VI Rule 17 CPC Proviso Not Applicable To Pre-2002 Suits: Allahabad High Court Permits Amendment In 1997 Plaint

Recently, the Allahabad High Court allowed an amendment application filed in a suit filed in the year 1997 on grounds that the amendment in proviso to Rule 17 of Order VI, specifying the bar on amendments in suits after commencement of trials, was enacted in 2002, i.e., after filing of the suit.

Justice Manish Kumar Nigam held

“The suit is of the year 1997 which is pre amendment and therefore, amended proviso will not apply to the suit in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in case of State Bank of Hyderabad v. Town Municipal Council..”

In State Bank of Hyderabad v. Town Municipal Council, the Supreme Court held that when the suit was filed in 1998, the amended proviso to Rule 17 of Order VI does not apply.

A petition under Article 277 of the Constitution of India was filed against the order of the Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Court No. 3, Gorakhpur, rejecting the application for amendment filed by the petitioner in the plaint which was instituted in 1997. It was rejected on grounds of long delay.

It was pleaded that there was slight change only in the relief sought as the prayer for mandatory injunction was dropped and certain minor corrections were made in the plaint. On the contrary, the respondent took shelter of Rule 17 of Order VI to state that the amendment could not be allowed after the commencement of trial.

Perusing the amendment sought, the Court observed that it did not change the nature of the suit. Accordingly, it set aside the order of the revisional court and allowed the amendment. The Court further directed that the suit be decided within a period of 6 months.

Case Title: Dayanand and 2 others Versus Mohan @ Ghure

Click Here To Read/Download Order