IN THE EIIGH C0{iRT OF' KA%A'I"A.KA CIRCUIT'
A1' DHARWAD » , " ..
Dated this the 31" clay of Dccembegf, x 'M 3 "
BEP'()RE;' _ V V
THE Horrnm MR, JU§*r;( i$ = V'
Writ Petition No. 3Vi4§2..¢f 2&8
Between: ' a i
Sicidaxth College of Educététzn'
R/0 Basaveshwar H ' v
Hospitai 1 Compiex . _ ~
Jamaizhandi _
£)ist.Baga13.«:ot'v4' = _; .
Represented ,
0fSruj»a_1:_1§ " ...P¢tifion€r
_ . ,S114'S¥;€i3;:fii1..}v§ Magadum, Advocate)
ShIi;'Ra£aasi1 ra3zg§. Depot
S11353'faS ._%R0a;d -~ A _____ .. e
' E££:;;=3tsa;1ic5;vM.'by" -its Partner
* --. ' Vesietigttiz. :A1~:ahva¢.:i.i
Ages'-.Majc;".'j -. A
Occ; Business
-- V R] o Respondent
This Wrii Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 2:22? of
V t1 %.e Constitution of fmiia, praying to quash the oztéer dated
” “V-12~11–2O08 passed on IA No.3 011:: OS N-0.366/2{)(}8 by the Civii
u Judga: Jr.D3:1., migaiwaé wide Ar1nexu.:=e~E.
This Writ Petition coming on for
day’, the Court made the foilowingi ‘ 1- ‘
Defendant has preferreei A.
the order passed by the diefiissmg L’
for amendment of the oe the that
firstly that the appfleefiegi “:3 .reerding of the
evidence, as it in View of the
amended on the ground} that
amenctmentt ‘ _;1i33«.t -zteeeeeary fer determming the real
contmversy’ betwreertf me-~ parties.
” V. -. 2 fI’he has filed a suit for recovery of a sum
along with interest against the petitioner
eCi1;'{ea8′;Q3:téit1′:–.§t;1¥s’.titution by alleging that it had placed orders ibr
suppigftéf library books and the said books have been ciuiy
slgipfiefi. Out of the total cost of Rs.61,3l(_’)~00 they have
Vtmade part payment 0f Rs.3{),()(){}–(}0 and Rs.5,()U{}~(){) and
there is a baiance of Rs.26,310~0(}. After service of summons,
defendants entered aepearance EIIEC1 filed written statement
Lt.
– 3 _
Contesting the claim. Issues were framed. The plaixltifl’ has
filed his afiieiavit by way of eviéence. At this stage, the ‘geiesent
appiicatie-:1 is filed. for amendment Of’WI’i’£'{‘.B13, stateme.11:E..’__’_ L” A’
3. A peruse} of the amendment soughij
fiefendant Wants to raise a plea
defenéant is run by one Srajan A’
Dhalwad, and. thereibze, the V
made a party to the prQeeeding.s.:eLIzdZ that –e11i:Jis had 130:’
1t10n–3’oim:1er 0t’necessa1y”‘p:-figtiesef } eéntract pleaded by
the ._p1ۤ1I1tiiT and the clefiendant, but
between eaid institution. Defendant has
not Vggleaieed any Thereferen, they wanted the written
be araendeti. If: was oppcsed.
_4, VV * Court on careful eonsiéeraticm of the
n:va1_ eoateeiietés and the amended provision of Order 6 Rule
H1? aué _v_éui0us judgments has come to the conciusicm, that
iéroposed amendment if allowed, Wouid infioduce a new
eaee which is has no basis. It is filed after the evidence of the
§1ai:::1tifi has commenced and theretbre, it has
amendment.
5. From the pleadings
cigar that the only issue befdrgl 31:16 trAiz~:1V Ceurf, .Vx5:héthe1~.
the piaintifi” has suppljfid :hei_..%:§§>a1:s%.’_:o £heT_g§:erf¢i:1aa;1:s in
pursuance of the order jriiszye they made part
payment and is fiilgre ‘fine. In order to
decide thsse. :’–.i$s?i:i§~’S, ~vfi3e1:.1é)mg3b$%§€1 VV”a’.3:iiendment is totally
unnece$H$:_;g1y,;;V~..V {if 1’V.;_t«}v1r=: is gable to demonstrate that ~
thee CI_1’£t3i’Vt5QC5,V5§ZJiv’L;V()=’ a13.3?””c9I:.t1}1ct vsfitkx the plaintiff and that
they ha\a”¥’3’~XT§'(‘}§ than the suit of tha plamtifi
xwfillgol Evezgx if déirrée is passeti against the deiéndant, it
‘V :’V*.?(‘)’1Lfif1 bindégfig on tbs insfimfion, which according to
fi1tE_ the institution which has to pay the mcmey.
fault ixsiifii. ficutce, dismissed.
Sbta fxjrsm angle: tbs §mLpugI1e:d order cannot ha fmlnd
SdF.§_
I’-‘£3:.-{$3
ks?! ~