IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
C.R. No.62 of 2008
Smt. Chunam Mani, W/o Sri Raghuvans Mani, resident
of Pandooi Kothi, Boring Road, PS Buddha
Colony,District & Town - Patna
........ Defendant - Petitioner
Versus
State Bank Of Bikaner & Jaipur having its head office at
Jaipur, represented through its Branch Manager/Officer
at Frazer Road, Patna, PS Kotwali, Town & District -
Patna ..........Plaintiff - Opposite Party
-----------
07- 18.10.2011 Heard Dr. Anshuman for the petitioner. The
defendant of Money Suit no.151 of 2003 has preferred this
application under section 115 of the Code of Civil
Procedure challenging the validity of the order dated
4.10.2007, whereby the defendant’s application for
amendment of the plaint has been rejected.
2. We have perused the materials on record and
considered the submission of the learned counsel for the
petitioner. Notice had been issued to the opposite party
herein but they have chosen not to appear before us inspite
of valid service of notice. The defendant (petitioner before
us) filed an application for amendment of the plaint in terms
of Order I, Rule 10, Code of Civil Procedure. The same has
been rejected by the impugned order. Law is well settled
that it is entirely for the plaintiff to determine the frame of
his suit and cannot be amended at the instance of the other
side. If the frame of the suit is ultimately found to be
2
deficient, the law shall take its own course to the extent of
dismissal of the suit in full or in part. It further appears to us
that the defendant by the application for amendment of the
plaint is trying to inject her own case into the plaint which is
impermissible in law. If the defendant has a separate case,
then it is open to her to institute an independent suit in
accordance with law.
3. This civil revision application is dismissed.
mrl ( S K Katriar, J. )