C.R. No. 801 of 2009 [1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Revision No. 801 of 2009 (O&M)
Date of decision: February 12, 2009
Isham Singh
.. Petitioner
v.
Smt. Sunita Devi and others
.. Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL
Present: Mr. Madan Pal, Advocate for the petitioner.
..
Rajesh Bindal J.
Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 29.1.2009,
passed by the learned court below, whereby the application filed by the plaintiffs-
respondents No. 1 to 3 under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure for
amendment of the plaint, was allowed.
Briefly, the facts are that respondents No. 1 to 3-plaintiffs filed a suit
for recovery of damages from the petitioner and respondents No. 4 and 5-
defendants on account of the death of Kanwar Bhan, husband of respondent No. 1
and father of respondents No. 2 and 3. During the pendency of the suit, application
under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed seeking
amendment of the plaint to the effect that respondents No. 1 to 3-plaintiffs be
permitted to sue as indigent persons. The application having been allowed, the
petitioner-defendant is before this Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the trial having
commenced, the amendment should not have been allowed at this stage. He further
submitted that respondents No. 1 to 3-plaintiffs had enough means to pay the court
fee and the court should not have granted exemption to them from filing the court
fee by permitting them to sue as indigent persons.
After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I do not find any
merit in the petition. The suit has been filed by respondents No. 1 to 3-plaintiffs on
account of the death of husband of respondent No. 1 and father of respondents No.
2 and 3 with the allegation that the petitioner and respondents No. 4 and 5-
defendants caused death of Kanwar Bhan. During the pendency of the suit, the
application was filed for amendment of the plaint. The court having examined the
C.R. No. 801 of 2009 [2]
claim made by respondents No. 1 to 3-plaintiffs permitted the amendment. The
amendment was only to the effect that initially specific amount of damages was
not claimed. In the amended plaint, a sum of Rs. 4,50,000/- was claimed as
compensation and as regards the court fee, permission was sought to sue as
indigent persons on account of financial position of the family after the death of
Kanwar Bhan. The court having considered the material on record threadbare has
come to the conclusion that respondents No. 1 to 3-plaintiffs have no means to pay
the court fee. The amendment which was allowed is only to the effect that the
amount of damages has been specified on account of the death of Kanwar Bhan in
the hands of petitioner and respondents No. 4 and 5. The kind of amendment,
which has been prayed for and allowed in the plaint by the learned court below,
can very well be allowed at any stage of the suit, considering the facts and
circumstances of the case where life of a bread earner of the family was taken by
the petitioner and respondents No. 4 and 5. It is only that the plaintiffs have been
permitted to sue as indigent persons with which no prejudice has been caused to
the defendants. The effort of the defendants seems to be to delay the proceedings.
For the reasons mentioned above, I do not find any merit in the
present petition and the same is dismissed.
(Rajesh Bindal)
Judge
12.2.2009
mk