Himachal Pradesh High Court Overturns Appellate Decision, Permits Amendment of Plaint in Ongoing Civil Dispute

Justice Ajay Mohan Goel allows amendment based on developments during appeal, ensuring fair adjudication in Nanak Chand vs. Madan Lal case.

In a significant ruling, the Himachal Pradesh High Court has set aside an appellate court's decision and allowed an amendment to the plaint in the ongoing civil dispute between Nanak Chand and Madan Lal. The decision, delivered by Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, underscores the importance of addressing subsequent developments in legal proceedings to achieve just outcomes.

The case, which was initially dismissed by the trial court, saw the petitioner, Nanak Chand, appeal the decision. During the appellate proceedings, an application for amendment under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code was filed by Nanak Chand. This amendment sought to incorporate events that transpired after the original suit, particularly concerning the alleged construction activities by the respondent, Madan Lal, on disputed land.

The controversy arose when the appellate court dismissed the amendment application, despite a Local Commissioner's report indicating new constructions on the site. The High Court found this dismissal erroneous, emphasizing that amendments reflecting subsequent developments should be permitted to ensure comprehensive adjudication.

Justice Goel noted that the necessity for the amendment arose due to developments during the appeal, fulfilling the 'due diligence' requirement. The court criticized the appellate authority for commenting on the merits of the Local Commissioner's report, which it deemed inappropriate. Instead, the High Court highlighted that the role of the appellate court was not to assess the report's veracity but to allow procedural fairness by permitting the amendment.

This ruling enables Nanak Chand to amend his plaint, thereby allowing the court to consider the new evidence presented by the Local Commissioner. The decision reaffirms the judiciary's commitment to justice by allowing parties to update their claims in light of new developments.

The parties have been directed to appear before the trial court on November 10, 2025, to proceed with the amended plaint. This judgment ensures that the respondent, Madan Lal, will have the opportunity to respond to the amended claims, maintaining procedural balance in the litigation process.

The ruling is a reminder of the judiciary's role in adapting to evolving circumstances within legal proceedings, ensuring that justice is not only done but seen to be done. Legal experts have praised the judgment for its focus on procedural fairness and its reinforcement of the principles underlying civil procedure.

Bottom Line:

Application for amendment of plaint under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code - Amendments based on subsequent events occurring during pendency of appeal should be allowed to serve the ends of justice.

Statutory provision(s): 

• Order 6, Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 
• Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908

Nanak Chand v. Madan Lal, (Himachal Pradesh) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2809031