I.A FILED ON: 12.10.2011
DISPOSED ON: 13.12.2011
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)
13TH DAY OF DECEMBER-2011
PRESENT :- SRI. B.S. REDDY PRESIDENT
SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER
SRI. A. MUNIYAPPA MEMBER
COMPLAINT NO.03/2011
Complainant/ APPLICANT | M.A.Inbanathan 156, Charles Cambell Road, Cox Town, Bangalore-560 005. Inperson. V/s. |
OPPOSITE PARTY | The President, Aircraft Employee’s Co-Operative Society Limited, No.15, 1st Floor CKC Garden, Opp.B.I.O.Hospital, K.H.Road, Banalore-560 027. Advocate:Sri.A.N.Krishna, |
O R D E RS ON I.A.
SRI.,B.S.REDDY,PRESIDENT
1. The complainant/Applicant filed this I.A. Under Order-6 Rule 17 R/W Section 151 CPC seeking amendment to the main Application to delete the provision of application Under Order 9 Rule 4 CPC and to add Section 151, 152 and 153 of CPC.
In the petition, it is stated that on receipt of the Order dt.05.05.2005 by registered post in complaint No.1175/2004, the complainant filed Miscellaneous Application Under Order-9 Rule-4 of CPC for recall of the said Order, for restoration of the complaint. Now the complainant has realized that the provision of law invoked in the said application is necessarily to be corrected for applying the correct legal provision which otherwise may result in a miscarriage of justice. The affidavit is also filed in support of this I.A. by the complainant.
2. In the objections filed by the Respondent/OP it is contended that the application is not maintainable, no valid grounds are shown for allowing the Application. The affidavit filed in support of the I.A is not in accordance with Civil Rules of practice. The very application itself is not maintainable, the question of filing present application for amendment is nothing but abuse process of law and procedure. The proposed amendment will changed the entire nature and cause of action. The intention of the Petitioner is to protract the proceedings to harass the OP in one way or the other. Hence it is prayed to dismiss the I.A.with exemplary costs.
3. Arguemtns on both sides heard.
4.Point for consideration is;
“Whether the applicant is to be permitted to amend the petition by allowing the proposed amendment”.
7. We record our finding in affirmative for the following:-
R E A S O N S
The complainant/petitioner has filed the main petition Under Order-9 Rule 4 of CPC to restore the complainant No.1175/2004 disposed on 05.05.2005 by this Forum. The provisions of law mentioned for the application filed as under Order-9 Rule-4 of CPC. Now by the proposed amendment the complainant intends to delete the said provisions and add provisions under Section 151, 152 and 153 CPC. By allowing the proposed amendment no prejudice will be caused to the OP and it cannot be said that the proposed amendment would change the entire nature and cause of action of the petition. The question as to whether the main petition filed is not maintainable is a matter to be considered at the time of disposal of the main petition. At this stage no opinion could be expressed on the merits of the main petition. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following:
O R D E R
I.A. filed by the complainant/applicant Under Order-6 Rule 17 R/W Section 151 of CPC is allowed.
(Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by her verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 13th day of DECEMBER-2011.)
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Cs.
