Bombay High Court Allows Amendment of Plaint in Suit for Declaration and Injunction — Applicant Seeks to Add Averments Regarding Will and Tenancy Rights. Amendment Sought After Commencement of Trial but Before Completion of Evidence — Court Holds That Amendments Necessary for Determining Real Controversy May Be Allowed Even After Trial Has Commenced, Subject to No Prejudice to Opposite Party.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY

Admin

2026-05-19 03:16:47

Font size:

Case Note & Summary

The applicant, Ashok Gupta, filed an Interim Application (IA) in a pending suit seeking amendments to the plaint. The suit was filed for declaration and injunction regarding certain property. The applicant sought to add averments concerning a Will allegedly executed by the original owner and tenancy rights in favor of the applicant. The trial had commenced, and the applicant's evidence was complete, but the respondents' evidence was ongoing. The respondents opposed the amendment, arguing that it was belated and would cause prejudice. The Court, after hearing both sides, allowed the amendment, holding that the proposed amendments were necessary for the determination of the real controversy between the parties. The Court noted that no prejudice would be caused to the respondents as they could be compensated by costs, and the applicant had shown due diligence in bringing the new facts to light. The Court directed the applicant to pay costs of Rs. 10,000 to the respondents and granted time for filing an amended plaint.

Headnote

A) Civil Procedure - Amendment of Pleadings - Order VI Rule 17 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Amendment after commencement of trial - The applicant/plaintiff sought to amend the plaint to add averments regarding a Will and tenancy rights after trial had commenced but before completion of evidence. The Court held that amendments necessary for determining the real controversy may be allowed even after trial has commenced, provided no prejudice is caused to the opposite party and the party seeking amendment satisfies the test of due diligence. (Paras 1-10)

B) Civil Procedure - Amendment of Pleadings - Prejudice to Opposite Party - Order VI Rule 17 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - The Court found that the proposed amendments did not change the nature of the suit and could be compensated by costs. The opposite party had not yet concluded its evidence, and the amendments were not belated or mala fide. (Paras 11-20)

C) Civil Procedure - Amendment of Pleadings - Due Diligence - Order VI Rule 17 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - The applicant explained that the Will and tenancy rights came to light after the filing of the suit, and the Court accepted this as sufficient cause for not raising the issue earlier. The Court held that the applicant had acted with due diligence. (Paras 21-30)

Issue of Consideration

Whether the applicant/plaintiff should be permitted to amend the plaint after the commencement of trial, and whether the proposed amendments are necessary for the determination of the real controversy between the parties.

Final Decision

The Interim Application is allowed. The applicant is permitted to amend the plaint subject to payment of costs of Rs. 10,000 to the respondents. The amended plaint to be filed within two weeks.

Law Points

Amendment of pleadings
Order VI Rule 17 CPC
Prejudice to opposite party
Real controversy
Due diligence
Trial commencement

Case Details

2026 LawText (BOM) (01) 119

Interim Application (L) No. 11484 of 2025 in Suit No. 2332 of 1985

2026-01-28

Firdosh P. Pooniwalla, J.

Mr. Karan Bhosale i/b M/s NDB Law for the Applicant, Mr. K.G. Munshi, Senior Advocate for the Respondent / Original Defendant Nos.2 and 3

Ashok Gupta

Rohini Gupta D/o. Sita Devi & Anr.

Nature of Litigation

Civil suit for declaration and injunction regarding property

Remedy Sought

Amendment of plaint to add averments regarding a Will and tenancy rights

Filing Reason

Applicant/Plaintiff sought to amend the plaint after discovering new facts about a Will and tenancy rights

Previous Decisions

Trial had commenced; applicant's evidence was complete; respondents' evidence was ongoing

Issues

Whether the applicant should be permitted to amend the plaint after commencement of trial Whether the proposed amendments are necessary for determination of real controversy Whether the applicant acted with due diligence

Submissions/Arguments

Applicant argued that the amendments are necessary to bring the real controversy before the court and no prejudice would be caused to the respondents Respondents opposed the amendment, stating it was belated and would cause prejudice

Ratio Decidendi

Amendments to pleadings may be allowed even after commencement of trial if they are necessary for determining the real controversy and no prejudice is caused to the opposite party, provided the party seeking amendment has acted with due diligence.

Judgment Excerpts

This Interim Application has been filed by the Applicant / Plaintiff seeking amendments to the Plaint. The case of the Applicant in the Interim Application is as under:

Procedural History

The suit was filed in 1985. Trial commenced, and the applicant's evidence was completed. The respondents' evidence was ongoing when the applicant filed this Interim Application for amendment of the plaint.