Report No. 163
Illustrative Cases (Supplementary Pleadings)
(i) If the defendant introduces a new case, it is fair to allow the plaintiff to file his subsequent pleading.
Shakoor v. Jaipur Development Authority, AIR 1987 Raj 19.
(ii) If the plaintiff amends (with leave) his plaint, defendant should be given leave to file a subsequent pleading.
Sali Charan v. Sukanti, AIR 1979 Ori 78.
Conversely, if the defendant amends his written statement, then leave should be granted to permit the plaintiff to file his additional pleading, to react to it.
(iii) Leave to file an additional pleading may be granted to take into account subsequent events, occurring after the filing of the suit and to avoid multiplicity of suits.
Ramaswami Naidu v. Pethu Pillai, AIR 1965 Mad 9.
(iv) When a minor attains majority during the pendency of litigation and is not satisfied with the pleading filed by the guardian ad litem, the minor should be given leave under this rule.
Shiva Kumar Singh v. Kari Singh, AIR 1962 Pat 159.
Your views on the point under consideration are invited in the light of above aspects.