1999 (12) TMI 872 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
The issues involved in the judgment include the rejection of an application for amendment of the written statement by the Trial Court and the High Court, the interpretation of Order 6 Rule 17 CPC regarding the power to allow amendments in pleadings, and the consideration of the benefit of Section 60(b) of the Indian Easements Act, 1882 in a dispute between a licensee and a grantor.

Amendment of Pleadings:
The appellant-defendant sought to amend the written statement to introduce an alternative plea regarding his status as a licensee and the irrevocability of the license under Section 60(b) of the Indian Easements Act, 1882. The Trial Court and the High Court rejected the application on the basis of mutual destructiveness and withdrawal of an alleged admission by the appellant.

Interpretation of Order 6 Rule 17 CPC:
The judgment emphasizes the purpose of Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, highlighting that the power to allow amendments is broad and can be exercised at any stage in the interest of justice. It stresses that amendments should be permitted to avoid unnecessary litigation and that a liberal approach should be adopted, especially when the other party can be compensated with costs.

Benefit of Section 60(b) of the Indian Easements Act, 1882:
The appellant-defendant sought to incorporate a plea in the written statement regarding the benefit of Section 60(b) of the Indian Easements Act, 1882 if not considered a lessee. The Court allowed this specific amendment, noting that it was not inconsistent with existing pleas and did not cause irretrievable prejudice to the respondent, provided the appellant paid arrears of the license fee and costs.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, permitting the appellant-defendant to amend the written statement to include the plea related to Section 60(b) of the Indian Easements Act, 1882. The appellant was directed to pay arrears of the license fee and costs within a specified period, with the payment not prejudicing the rights of the parties to be adjudicated by the Trial Court. The judgment underscored the importance of promoting justice through amendments while ensuring fairness and avoiding undue prejudice to either party.