A single Bench of Justice Puneet Gupta while setting aside an order passed by the trial Court allowing an Amendment of Plaint has held that “It is not that application filed for amendment of the plaint has to be allowed just to avoid multiplicity of suits. Every case has its own facts and merits which are required to be considered while allowing or rejecting the application filed for amendment of the plaint.”

The Trial Court has allowed an Amendment of the Plaint whereby the plaintiffs were allowed to challenge the decree passed in the year 1992. It was contended before the court that the said amendment changes the very nature of suit and that the the judgment and decree was being challenged by the plaintiffs through the medium of amendment application though it was barred by limitation as on date when the application was moved for amendment of the suit.

The Court observed that The judgment and decree passed in the year 1992 obtained finality on the expiry of the limitation period unless it gets nullified in any subsequent proceedings if permitted by law. It is not disputed that the same was not earlier challenged. The plaintiffs could not be allowed to amend the suit so as to challenge the decree passed in favour of the defendants in the pending suit. The rights which had accrued to the plaintiffs in their favour by virtue of decree passed in the year 1992 could not be challenged in the suit in hand merely on the ground that the plaintiffs in the present suit had come to know of the passing of the decree only during pendency of the suit. The remedy, if any, to the plaintiffs was to file separate proceedings if countenanced by law. 

The court further observed that the court can allow the application for amendment of the pleadings in terms of the Order VI Rule 17 of CPC at any stage of the proceedings. However, the same cannot be allowed by the court unless there are reasonable grounds for allowing the application. It is not that application filed for amendment of the plaint has to be allowed just to avoid multiplicity of suits.

The court accordingly set aside the order passed by the trial court.