Calcutta High Court Allows Amendment of Pleadings Post-Trial: Necessary for Determining Real Questions in Controversy

Court sets aside trial court’s dismissal, underscores the importance of amendments for the sake of justice. The Calcutta High Court, in a landmark ruling, has allowed the amendment of pleadings in a case concerning landlord-tenant eviction despite the case being at the argument stage. The judgment delivered by Justice Bibhas Ranjan De emphasizes that amendments necessary for determining the real questions in controversy should be permitted to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and to ensure justice.

The petitioner, Sri Soumen Chowdhury, filed a suit for eviction and mesne profits against the opposite party, Sri Joydeb Kundu, registered as Title Suit No. 218 of 2012, in the Court of the Learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, 2^nd Court, Howrah. During the trial, the petitioner sought to amend the plaint to include a detailed description of Holding No. 16/1 and Holding No. 16/1/1, Gopal Lal Chowdhury Lane. However, the trial court dismissed the amendment application on 26.04.2022. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed a civil revision application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India before the Calcutta High Court.

Justice Bibhas Ranjan De noted that the intention behind Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) is to provide ample opportunity for parties to amend their pleadings at any stage to determine the real questions in controversy. The proviso to this rule restricts amendments post-trial commencement unless due diligence can be shown for not raising the matter earlier.

“The object of the rule is that courts should try the merits of the case that come before them and should consequently allow all amendments that may be necessary for determining the real question in controversy between the parties,” the court cited from Abdul Rehman v. Mohd. Ruldu.

Justice De disagreed with the trial court’s view that the proposed amendment would change the nature and character of the suit. He emphasized, “The main contentious dispute regarding the instant suit is deeply interlinked with the issue proposed to be raised by the petitioner through amendment.”

The court underscored that the amendment is essential for the just resolution of the landlord-tenant dispute. According to the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997, the plaintiff must prove reasonable requirement and lack of suitable alternative accommodation. The proposed amendment aimed to address these crucial aspects and should not be dismissed solely due to the stage of the trial.

Justice Bibhas Ranjan De stated, “Amendment of pleadings should be considered only for the purpose of determining the real question of controversy in the suit irrespective of the stage of trial otherwise multiplicity of proceedings will be the only consequence.”

The Calcutta High Court’s judgment to set aside the trial court’s dismissal of the amendment application reaffirms the judiciary’s commitment to resolving the real questions in controversy and ensuring justice. This decision underscores that procedural rules should not obstruct substantive justice, particularly in civil disputes involving fundamental issues like eviction and mesne profits. The ruling is anticipated to have significant implications for future cases, promoting a more flexible approach to amendments in civil proceedings.

Date of Decision: 19.07.2024