w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



KANORIA PETRO PRODUCTS LIMITED VERSUS SHEETLA AGRO INDUSTRIES

    Criminal Appeal No: 392 of 1994

    Decided On, 22 February 1995

    At, High Court of Delhi

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DALVEER BHANDARI

    For the Appearing Parties: B.S. Arora, Sandip Agarwal, Advocates.



Judgment Text

DALVEER BHANDARI,J.


( 1 ) THIS revision petition is directed against the order dated 3rd February, 1994 by which the application under Order 6 Rule 17 filed by the respondent-Sheetla Agro Industries was allowed.


( 2 ) THE learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner pointed out that the written statement filed in Suit No. 253/93 on 2nd April, 1993 in paras 4 and 5, it is mentioned that the answering defendant, i. e. , Sheetia Agro Industries received supplies at Lucknow from M/s. G. S. Industries. Paras 4 and 5 are set out as under:


"4. Only this much is admitted that the answering defendant received supplies at Lucknow from M/s. G. S. Industries. Rest of the contents of para underreply are denied. See additional pleas. 5. G. S. Industries supplied goods at Lucknow. Rest denied subject to additional pleas. "


( 3 ) IN the additional written statement the defendant Sheetla Agro Industries has taken entirely contrary stand. The-relevant para 19 of additional written statement is set out as under:


"19. That the defendant has never made any agreement with G. S. Industries for supply, nor was the defendant concerned in any way with the G. S. Industries, as the defendant placed no orders for supply to it. "


( 4 ) BY the said amendment the defendant wants to take entirely contrary stand which the defendant cannot be permitted to take by way of amendment in the written statement.


( 5 ) THE Courts are ordinarily liberal in permitting amendments in pleadings but when the amendment in the case of the plaintiff, amounts to changing of the nature and character of the suit and in the case of the defendant, when the entire defence already taken is sought to be changed, then the amendment ha

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

s to be discouraged and declined. ( 6 ) IN view of aforesaid conclusion the impugned order of the Trial Court is set aside. The revision petition is accordingly allowed and disposed of.
O R