C.S. Company & Ors Vs. Kerala State Electricity Board  INSC 1347
(29 October 1996)
O R D
special leave petition arises from the order of the learned single judge made
on August 2, 1996 in CRP No.476/96.
admitted position is that the respondent had filed the suit for settlement of
accounts on the basis of a contract dated may 12,1983. He also sought for
decree jointly and severally against the defendants 2 to 4 or against their
estate for the amount due; for a declaration that the respondent is entitled to
recover all the loss the damages form defendants and their assets when the same
was ascertained, as been filed on February 15,1995 under Order VI, Rule 17, CPC
for amendment of the plaint for converting the suit into one for damages
quantifying the damages as stated in para 8A. The trial Court dismissed the
application. In the revision, the High Court allowed it.
this special leave petition.
contended for the petitioner that a suit merely for settlement of accounts and
declaration that the respondent is entitled to recover damages form the
defendant cannot be converted into a suit for damages in particular after the
right of recovery is barred by limitation, i.e., a valuable right had accrued
to the petitioners. The High Court, therefore, is not right in granting the
amendment. We find no force in the contention. It is seen that what is sought
to be amended is paragraph 8A and the suit is to recover the quantified amount
as damages based upon the original cause of action, namely, the contract
referred to hereinbefore. It is seen that the original suit was for settlement
of accounts and fastening a liability jointly and severally against all the
defendants and the assets and estates. The relief originally sought for also
was to declare the liability of the damages to be ascertained and recoverable
from them. Thus, it could be seen that as per the original cause of action, the
relief now sought for was available in the suit itself. Instead of settlement
of account, the respondent is now seeking for damages against the respondent
and the damages instead of being ascertained were quantifies in paragraph 8A of
the plaint. The amendment does not constitute addition of any new cause of action.
The respondent is not introducing any new cause of action nor it would change
the cause of action as originally pleaded.
there is neither change of cause of action nor introduction of any new cause of
action after the bar of limitation. The High Court was, therefore, right in
allowing the petition for amendment of the plaint.
special Leave Petition is accordingly dismissed.