The Supreme Court has held that amendment application in civil cases should not be entertained, if such pleas are filed with an ulterior motive to delay the proceedings.
A bench headed by Justice Dalveer Bhandari in its judgement noted, ‘in our considered view Order 6, Rule 17 is one of the important provisions of the CPC but we have no hesitation in observing that this is one of the most misused provisions of the code for dragging the proceedings indefinitely, particularly in Indian courts which are otherwise overburdened with pending cases.
‘All Civil courts have a long list of cases, therefore, compelled to grant long dates, which causes delay in disposal of the cases.’ The apex court, while dismissing the appeal of Revajeetu Builders and Developers against the Karnataka High Court judgement dated September 16, 2006, also imposed a cost of Rs 1 lakh for filing an amendment application to overreach the orders of the Supreme Court.
The appellant had filed a suit for recovery of Rs 52,97,111 with an interest of 18 per cent per annum.
The sale deed, dated September 30, 1987 executed by Narainaswamy and Sons, was held to be invalid and inoperative by the Supreme Court on a PIL filed by one S Vasudeva.
The appellants, who had earlier admitted respondents as owners of the land, later filed an application for amendment seeking to declare the respondents as trespassers.
