Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Jayasree Ghosh & Ors vs Krishna Sikdar & Ors on 13 June, 2019
1 04. 13.06.2019
mb In the High Court at Calcutta Civil Appellate Jurisdiction C.O. No. 1181 of 2019 Jayasree Ghosh & Ors.
-Vs.-
Krishna Sikdar & Ors.
Mr. Srijib Chakraborty, Ms. Sushmita Singh, Mr. Amit Chowdhury...for the petitioners Mr. Krishna Sikdar...opposite party no. 1 in person on behalf of the opposite parties.
The present revisional application is directed against an order whereby an application of the plaintiffs/petitioners for amendment of their injunction application was refused.
Learned counsel for the petitioners rightly points out that since a similar amendment to the plaint was previously allowed, to which an additional written statement has already been filed by the defendants, there was no occasion to disallow the present amendment of the injunction application. 2 Learned counsel for the petitioners is also justified in arguing that no reason was attributed for such dismissal, in the impugned order.
It is submitted on behalf of the opposite parties that the trial court was justified in refusing the amendment.
However, since a similar amendment was already allowed in connection with the plaint, the trial court ought to have allowed the amendment to the injunction application as well, since the logic for deciding the application for amendment of the plaint, which order has attained finality, would equally apply to an amendment of the injunction application. This apart, the portion of the impugned order rejecting the amendment is vitiated by absence of proper reasons.
As such, C.O. No. 1181 of 2019 is allowed, thereby setting aside the portion of the impugned order whereby the amendment to the injunction application was refused and allowing such amendment to the injunction application.
Petitioners are directed to file an amended injunction application in the court below within a fortnight from date; additional written objection to the same, if any, shall be filed by the defendants/opposite parties within a fortnight thereafter. 3
The trial judge is requested to dispose of the injunction application as expeditiously thereafter as the business of the said court permits.
There shall, however, be no order as to costs. Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities.
(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.)