Today is fixed for order on MA being no. 100/2022.

The Ld. Advocates on both sides have been heard for and against the application for amendment of the complaint. It needs to be mentioned here that the Ld. Advocate of the complainant have cited the decision reported in 2015 (27) R.C.R. (Civil) 267 and 1989 AIR Calcutta 190 in support of his submission that the amendment prayer should be allowed. The Ld. Advocate appearing for the complainant has however contended that on the plea of amendment the complainant has wanted to make out a new case which is not permissible in law. According to the Ld. Advocate of the complainant, the amendment sought for only relates to computation of amount and also to subsequent events and nothing more than that. As opined by the Hon’ble NCDRC in the case reported in 2015 (27) R.C.R. (Civil) 267 and by the Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta in 1989 AIR (Cal) 190 that computation can be rectified and subsequent events may be incorporated by amending the complaint. On careful perusal of the amendment petition in the light of the other material on record it appears that the complainant has sought for the amendment of the complaint only to rectify computation error and to incorporate the subsequent events. The nature and character of the case will not be changed if the amendment sought for is allowed.

Such being the position the application for amendment is allowed and MA being no. 100/2022 is thus disposed of.

As such, 09.09.2022 is fixed for hearing of the MA being no. 85/2022.