DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW

UNIVERSITY
VISAKHAPATNAM, A.P., INDIA

WHERE AN AMENDMENT IS FOUND TO BE NECESSARY FOR

PROMOTING THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND NOT FOR DEFEATING
THE SAME THE APPLICATION SHOULD BE ALLOWED- ANALYSIS

CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE

BHAGYA LAXMI. N

G. NAGA LAHARI
ROLL NO: 2013048
V SEMESTER

PLAGARISM

CERTIFICATE

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I consider myself lucky that I got the chance to do a work on this topic that was to where an
amendment is found to be necessary for promoting the ends of justice and not for defeating
the same the application should be allowed- analysis.
I thank the subject teacher, Bhagya Laxmi. N, for letting me choose the topic.

ABSTRACT
The Civil Procedure code of 1908, prescribes the provisions in which the pleadings of
Amendments can be introduced during the process of trial. Since, the bygone era, the belief
that most of the legal systems were that the courts must have been unguided and unrestricted
power for the amendment to the pleadings, so as to further that the cause of justice without
any cause of an iota or injustice to the adverse party. Rule 17 of Order VI provides powers to
the courts in India to allow the amendments. In addition to this, the Privy Council, the
Supreme Court and other Courts in India have been implementing this practice since the
ages. In the year 1990s, a lot of concerns were raised for the extent of usage of this facility in
most of the cases litigated till then. Various reports were also found such that no stone has
been unturned and not to utilize the provision and hence there is a need of re-look.
By the Civil Procedure code (Amendment) Act, in the year 1999, this provision relates to the
amendment of pleadings, which was deleted. But, the Justice Malimath Committee, which
recommended the rule 17 of this order should be deleted, in order to avoid delay and also to
ensure speedy disposal of cases. This Amendment Act received the same assent of the
President but it was not brought into the force. Then, due to the lot of uproar in the nation
and opposition from Advocates, the government has reconsidered the question and then
revived the rule by which the next Amendment Act in 2002 with the proviso. However, it was
again reintroduced by the Civil Procedure code (Amendment) Act, 2002, but with a provison
and it was brought into effect from July 1, 2002.
In this backdrop, it is important to note and understand the discourse by which the law on
Amendment of pleadings will be developing either by the way of legislative enactments or by
the way of judicial activism.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE
PLAGARISM
CERTIFICATE
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
ABSTRACT
1. OBJECTIVES
2. INTRODUCTION
3. HYPOTHESIS
4. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
5. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
6. PLEADINGS, INTERPRETATION & OBJECT OF RULE
7. NATURE & SCOPE OF PLEADINGS
8. GUIDELINES FOR AMENDMENT OF PLEADINGS
9. RAISE OF AMENDMENT OF PLEADINGS
10. WHEN AMENDMENT CAN BE ALLOWED?
11. GRANTING 7 REFUSAL OF AMENDMENT
12. THE RULE IN THE CASE REVAJEETU
BUILDERS&DEVELOPERS V NARAYANA SWAMY &
OTHERS
13. AMENDMENT TO PLEADINGS: PROMOTING ENDS OF
JUSTICE
CONCLUSION
BIBLIOGRAPHY

PAGE
NO
02
03
04
05
08
08
09
09
10
10
12
12
13
13
14
16

16
17
18

LIST OF CASES
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)

Rajesh kumar Agarwal v K.K. Modi, (2006) 4 SCC 385: AIR 2006 SC 1647
Narayana Pillai V Parameshwaran Pillai, AIR 2000 SC 614
Ma Shwe Mya v. Maung Mo Huang, AIR 1992 PC 249
Jaswant Kaur V Subhash Paliwal, 2010 (2) SCC 124
Vidyabai V Padmalatha, 2009 AIR (SC) 1433: 2009 (2) SCC 409
Olympic Industries V Mulla Hussainy Bhai Mulla Akberally, 2009 (9) SCALE 338
Venture Global Engineering V Satyam Computer Services Ltd, 2010 AIR SC 3371:
2010 (8) SCC 660

8) pirogonda Hongonda patil v kalgonda shidgonda patil ,(2008) 3 SCC 511

9) Ganga Bai v vijay kumar, AIR 1974 sc 1126
10) State of Maharashtra v Hindustan Construction Company Ltd, AIR 2010 SC 1299
11) State of A.P v Pioneer Builders, AIR 2007 SC 113
12) Revajeetu Builders & othrs v Narayanaswamy & Sons & Ors ,

1. OBJECTIVES

The paper deals with the interpretation and analysis of Amendment of pleadings and where an
amendment is found to be necessary for promoting the ends of justice and not for defeating
the same the application should be allowed.
2. INTRODUCTION
According to Black Law Dictionary Pleadings are written allegations of what is affirmed in
the one side, or denied on the other side, disclosing to the court or jury having to try the cause
the real matter in dispute between the parties. The Civil Procedure code of 1908, prescribes
the provisions in which the pleadings of Amendments can be introduced during the process of
trial. Since, the bygone era, the belief that most of the legal systems were that the courts must
have been unguided and unrestricted power for the amendment to the pleadings, so as to
further that the cause of justice without any cause of an iota or injustice to the adverse party.
Rule 17 of Order VI provides powers to the courts in India to allow the amendments. In
addition to this, the Privy Council, the Supreme Court and other Courts in India have been
implementing this practice since the ages. In the year 1990s, a lot of concerns were raised for
the extent of usage of this facility in most of the cases litigated till then. Various reports were
also found such that no stone has been unturned and not to utilize the provision and hence
there is a need of re-look. By the Civil Procedure code (Amendment) Act, in the year 1999,
this provision relates to the amendment of pleadings, which was deleted. But, the Justice
Malimath Committee, which recommended the rule 17 of this order should be deleted, in
order to avoid delay and also to ensure speedy disposal of cases. This Amendment Act
received the same assent of the President but it was not brought into the force. Then, due to
the lot of uproar in the nation and opposition from Advocates, the government has
reconsidered the question and then revived the rule by which the next Amendment Act in
2002 with the proviso. However, it was again reintroduced by the Civil Procedure code
(Amendment) Act, 2002, but with a provison and it was brought into effect from July 1, 2002.
In this backdrop, it is important to note and understand the discourse by which the law on
Amendment of pleadings will be developing either by the way of legislative enactments or by
the way of judicial activism.
Order 6 deals with pleadings in general. Rule 1 defines pleading, while rule 2 lays down the
fundamental principles of pleadings. Rule 3 to 13 require the parties to supply necessary
particulars. Rule 14 and 15 provide for signing and verification of pleadings. Rule 16

empowers a court to strike out unnecessary pleadings. Rules 17 and 18 contain provisions
relating to amendment of pleadings.1
The most challenging problem, which is facing the administration of justice in the country is
the backlog and in which, it results the delay in criminal and civil cases at every level, from
the lower level courts to the level of Supreme Court. One of the provisions, which contributes
to the provision related to the Amendment of pleadings, which is given in Order VI, rule 17
of the civil procedure code.2 The Amendment of pleadings means, that the court should/may
at any stage of the proceedings allow the either party to alter or amend his/her pleadings in
such a manner and on such terms/conditions as may be just and all such an Amendments shall
be made to be necessary for the purpose of determining real questions in the controversy
between the parties, provided that no other application for amendment shall be allowed after
the commencement of trial, unless the court comes to the conclusion, that in spite of the due
diligence, the party could not have raise any matter before the commencement of trial.3
3. HYPOTHESIS
The Order VI deals with pleadings in general. Rule 17 and Rule 18 of that Order defines
amendment to the pleadings. The court may/shall at any stage of proceedings allow either the
party to alter or to amend his/her pleadings in such a manner and on such terms/conditions as
may be just or any such Amendments shall be made as may be necessary for the purpose of
determining the real questions in the controversy between both the parties. But, no
application for the Amendment can be allowed after the commencement of trial, unless the
court would not have raised the matter before the commencement of trial. One of the most
important objects of the allowance to the amendment of pleadings is to prevent the
multiplicity of suits. If the amendment is sought to seek an ancillary relief is not allowed,
then, such the party might have a remedy to raise the same in the subsequent case. The
Amendments relating to constructive res judicata should not be allowed by the courts.
4. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
1 C K Tatwani, Civil Procedure Code, 7th Edition, Eastern Book Company, 2013, New Delhi, pg.192
2 Tandons, The code of civil procedure, 26th Edition, Allahabad Law Agency, 2005, Haryana, pg.
180-181
3 Ibid
9

1) CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE BY JATINDRA KUMAR DAS: The book

attempts to analyse critically Indian High Court and Apex Court cases on which the
Law of Civil Procedure. It also evaluates relation between the statutory procedural
law and also case laws as subject. Most importantly, that the book presents recent
judgments of Supreme Court, particularly which is based on Post Amendment Acts of
1999 and 2002. But, also these cases have been analysed in addition to the critical
examination of the radical and also far reaching effect of the Civil Code Procedure.
2) CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE BY M P JAIN: This book is an elaborate
commentary on the amendments, Central and State with exhaustive texts,
comments and case laws with references of the Supreme and the High
Courts.
5. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
5.1.
Research Questions
1)
2)
3)
4)
5.2.

What is an amendment?
What are the objects, nature and scope of an amendment?
What are the provisions and consequences of an amendment?
What are the essentials of applicability of an amendment?
Sources of Data

The primary sources of data are internet source and books.

5.3.

Method of Writing

The research paper is in theoretical in nature.

5.4.

Mode of Citation

The mode of citation used in this paper is Harvard Blue Book Citation.
6. PLEADINGS, INTERPRETATION & OBJECT OF RULE
Pleadings are the statement in writing, which is delivered by each party alternately to his/her
opponent, stating what his contentions will be at the trial process, giving all such details as
his/her opponent needs to know in such an order to prepare his/her case in answer. It is an
essential element of the pleading that the material fact and any necessary particulars must be
stated in the pleadings and those decisions cant be based on the grounds, which are outside
the pleadings. But, many a times the party may find it compulsory to amend his/her pleadings
before or during the trial of the case. But, one of the most important objects of allowing the
Amendment to pleadings is to prevent multiplicity of the suits. If the amendment is sought to
seek an ancillary relief, which is not allowed, then the party might have a remedy to raise the
10

same in the subsequent case. The amendments relating to constructive res judicata must not
be allowed by the courts.4
The interpretation of Amendment of pleadings, the rules of interpretation should be followed
in interpreting the provision is very simple. The provision can also be divided into two parts.
Where the first part is discretionary (may) and gives the wide and unfettered discretion to
decide on case-to case basis and analysis whenever it appears to be just. The court may or
may not allow the amendment to the proceeding to determine the real questions of
controversy. The approach of the Court should be liberal and should not be hypothetical. 5
Hence, the Amendment to proceedings is not right; rather it is the discretion of the court. But,
the second part is mandatory (Shall) and orders the court to accept all the applications
which are necessary for the purpose of determining the real issue between both the parties if
it finds that the parties could not have raised any of the issue in spite of the due diligence
before the trial commencement. However, such a discretion must be exercised by the
application of the judicial mind according to the well-established principles.6
The object of amendment, the rationale behind the rule of amendment is that the courts
should try the cases on merits and hence should allow all the amendments which are
necessary for determining the real question in controversy between the parties provided no
injustice or prejudice is caused to the other side. In case of Rajesh kumar Agarwal v K.K.
Modi,7 the apex court observed that the object of Order VI, Rule 17 is that the courts should
try the merits of the case that come before them. The courts should allow all the Amendments
that may be necessary for determining the real question in controversy between the parties
provided that, it do not cause any injustice or prejudice to the other side. The rule of
Amendment is a essential a rule of justice, equity and good conscience. The power of
amendment should be exercised in larger interest of doing full and complete justice to the
4 MP Jain, The code of Civil procedure, 2nd Edition, Publishers Editorial board, 2007, Nagpur, Pg.
538
5 Narayana Pillai V Parameshwaran Pillai, AIR 2000 SC 614
6 Amendment of pleadings, http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/article/amendment-topleadings-and-the-approach-of-the-judiciary-1427-1.html, last seen on 16th September, 2015 at 6.00
PM
7 (2006) 4 SCC 385: AIR 2006 SC 1647
11

parties before the court. The court always gives a leave to amend the pleadings of a party
unless it is satisfied that the party applying was acting with mala fide. The amendment to
pleading should be liberally allowed since procedural obstacles ought not to impede the
dispensation of justice. The court should also take the notice of subsequent events in order to
shorten the process of litigation, to preserve and to safeguard the rights of both the parties and
to sub-serve the ends of justice.8
7. NATURE AND SCOPE OF PLEADINGS
The concept of Amendment to pleadings can be traced back to the decision of the Privy
Council in case of Ma Shwe Mya v. Maung Mo Huang.9 Where the Court observed that the
rules of Courts are nothing, but the provisions intended for securing the ends of justice and all
those rules should be subordinate to achieve the purpose. For the purpose to be achieved, full
powers of Amendment must be enjoyed and should liberally exercised by the courts and it
has also added a caveat, such that an amendment cannot be made to substitute one cause of
action for another.
Order I, Rule 10 of CPC confers the power to the court either to add or to strike off a party to
the suit. The right of the court either to add or to subtract the parties can be exercised
either suo moto or by an application of the party. The situations wherein the amendments of
the pleadings should or should not be allowed cannot be laid down by the court of law in a
straight jacket formula. It must be decided on case-by-case basis and should be analysed.
However, this rule applies to the other proceedings such as an execution proceeding, petitions
under Special Marriage Act, Arbitration proceedings, etc.10
8. GUIDELINES FOR AMENDMENT OF PLEADINGS
1. The Applicant must set out specifically in his application details of propose
amendment.
2. Applicant must state the reasons for seeking to amend his/her pleadings, especially
explanation of delay, so that the opposition is not taken by any surprise.
8 D. N. Mathur, The code of civil procedure, 2nd edition, Central law publications, New Delhi, pg.176
9 AIR 1992 PC 249
10 Amendment of pleadings, http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/report222.pdf, last seen on
16th September, 2015 at 6.20 PM
12

3. Generally the Amendment is allowed, unless it is shown that such an amendment

would result in prejudice to the opposing party.
4. Party seeking to the amendment of plaint shouldnt act with malafide intentions.
5. Appellate court may permit the amendment at appellate stage to enable the party to
raise a new plea.11
9. RAISE OF AMENDMENT OF PLEADINGS
There are different occasions that, which gives raise to Amendment of Pleadings, and are as
follows:
Section 152 of CPC, Amendment of Clerical error or arithmetic mistakes in judgments or
orders or decrees. Section.153 defines that Amendment of proceedings in a suit, by the court,
whether suomoto12 or an application of the parties, for the purpose of determining the real
issues between the parties. Section 153 A defines, that the Amendment of clerical error or any
arithmetic mistakes in judgements of appeal suit. Order 1 Rule 10 Sub rule 2 of Civil
Procedure Code talks about adding or striking out parties. Order 6 Rule 16 defines
compulsory Amendment and Order 6 Rule 17 defines Voluntary Amendment.
Compulsory Amendment Order 6 Rule 16, court may at any stage of the proceedings order to
strike out or amend, any matter in any pleading, which, may be unnecessary or vexations or
scandalous or frivolous in nature, may tend to embarrass or prejudice or delay fair trail, is
abuse of process of process of court.
Voluntary Amendment, Court may at any stage of the pleadings allow either the party to alter
or to amend their pleadings in such a manner and in such the terms as may be just. All such
Amendments are to be made to determine the real issues between both the parties. No
application for an amendment will be allowed after the commencement of trail, unless, the
court comes to conclusion that, in spite of due diligence, the party couldnt have raised any
issue before the commencement of the trail.
Order 6 Rule 18, failure to amend after the order, if the party fails to amend pleadings after
obtaining the court grant, within the time limit specified in the said order (or 15 days), he will

11 Dr. Avtar Singh, Code of civil procedure, 2nd Edition, Central Law Publication, 2009, Allahabad,
pg.76
12 On its own
13

not be allowed to amend the pleadings after the expiration of the said period, unless court
grants the leave to do so.
10. WHEN AMENDMENT CAN BE ALLOWED?
It is very clear that no amendment can be made without leave of the court. Therefore, the
party desirous of amending the pleadings is required to apply to the court for seeking
permission to amend. The amendment may be allowed by the court at any stage of the
proceedings. The amendment may be allowed even after commencement of trial if the court
is satisfied that in spite of the due diligence, parties could not have raised matter earlier.
In Jaswant Kaur V Subhash Paliwal13, the apex court held that power to allow the amendment
of pleadings is very wide and said to be applied liberally.
In Vidyabai V Padmalatha14, the supreme court held that the courts jurisdiction to allow
amendment is taken away unless conditions precedent therefore are satisfied, viz. it must
come to a conclusion that in spite of due diligence, parties couldnt have raised matter before
the commencement of trial.
In Olympic Industries V Mulla Hussainy Bhai Mulla Akberally,15 the apex court held that
courts should be more generous in allowing amendment of counter statement of defendant
than in case of a plaint.
In case of Venture Global Engineering V Satyam Computer Services Ltd,16 it was held that in
dealing with the prayer for an amendment, the courts normally prefer substance to form and
techniques and the interest of justice is one of the most relevant considerations. Therefore, if
the party is entitled to amend its Amendment of pleadings, having regard to the justice of the
case, the right of the party, to amend cannot be defeated just because a wrong section or
wrong provision has been quoted in the amendment petition.
11. GRANTING AND REFUSAL OF AMENDMENT
13 2010 (2) SCC 124
14 2009 AIR (SC) 1433: 2009 (2) SCC 409
15 2009 (9) SCALE 338
16 2010 AIR SC 3371: 2010 (8) SCC 660
14

Granting of Amendment: The principle that an amendment can be allowed by the court at
any stage provided that it satisfies the following conditions:

That the proposed amendment which does not work injustice to the other side, which,

as said above, is not injustice if it can be compensated in money;

That the proposed amendment is necessary for the purpose of determining the real

questions in controversy between the parties

That the proposed amendment is not such as to turn a suit of one character in a suit of

another character; and

That there is bona fide on the part of the applicant.

In case of pirogonda Hongonda patil v kalgonda shidgonda patil,17 where the main points to
be considered before a party is allowed to amend his pleading are: firstly, whether the
amendment is necessary for determination of the real question in controversy; secondly, can
the amendment be allowed without injustice to the other side. Thus, it has been held that
where amendment is sought to avoid multiplicity of suits, or where the parties in the plaint
are wrongly described, or where some properties are omitted from the plaint by inadvertence,
the amendment should be allowed.
Refusal of Amendment: The Supreme Court has rightly observed in Ganga Bai v vijay
kumar,18 the power to allow an amendment is undoubtedly wide and may at any stage be
appropriately exercised in the interest of justice, the law of limitation notwithstanding. But
the exercise of such far reaching discretionary powers is governed by judicial considerations
and wider the discretion, greater ought to be the care and circumspection on the part of the
court. Generally, the leave to amend will be refused by the court in:

Leave to amend will be refused when the amendment is not necessary for the purpose
of determining the real questions in controversy between the parties, which happens

where the amendment is merely technical or useless and is of no substance.

It will be refused where the effect of the amendment would introduce a totally
different, new and inconsistent case which will require further evidence. An

amendment of this character could not bring out the real issues in the suit.
It will be refused where the amendment would cause injustice to the opposite party as
cannot be compensated for by imposing terms as to costs or otherwise.

17 (2008) 3 SCC 511

18 AIR 1974 sc 1126
15

It will be refused where the effect of the proposed amendment would be to take away
from the defendant a legal right which has accrued to him by lapse of time. The
plaintiff will not be allowed to amend his plaint by adding a fresh claim or a new
cause of action, which is barred by limitation at the date of the application for

amendment through not barred at the date of the suit.

It will be refused where the plaintiffs suit would be wholly displaced by the proposed

amendment.
It will be refused when the party was fully aware of facts on which he seeks to put

forward a new case.

It will be refused where a plaintiff bringing a suit on certain cause of action seeks
amendment to introduce a new and independent cause of action arising subsequent to

the institution of suit.

It will be refused where the application for amendment is not made in good faith.19
12. THE RULE IN THE CASE OF REVAJEETU BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS
V NARAYANASWAMY AND SONS AND OTHERS
Some of the basic principles emerge which ought to be taken in to consideration while
allowing or rejecting the application for amendment:

Whether the amendment sought is imperative for proper and effective adjudication of

the case.
Whether the application for amendment is bonafide or malafide
The amendment should not cause such prejudice to the other side which cannot be

compensated adequately in terms of money

Refusing amendment would in fact lead to injustice or lead to multiple litigation
Whether the proposed amendment constitutionally or fundamentally changes the

nature or character of the case; and

As a general rule, the court should decline amendments if a fresh suit on the amended
claims would be barred by limitation on the date of application. These are some of the
important factors which may be kept in mind while dealing with application filed
under order 6 Rule 17. These are only illustrative and not exhaustive.

The above principles make it clear that courts have ample power to allow the application for
amendment of the plaint. However, it must be satisfied that the same is required in the

19 Shailendar Malik, code of civil procedure, 27th Edition, Allahabad Law Agency, 2011, Delhi,
pg.217-18
16

interest of justice and for the purpose of determination of real question in controversy
between the parties.
13. AMENDMENT TO PLEADINGS: PROMOTING ENDS OF JUSTICE
The object of the Rule 17, Order 6 of the code is to empower courts to grant amendment of
pleadings in the larger interest of doing full and complete justice to the parties. Provision for
the amendment of pleadings is intended for promoting the ends of justice and not for
defeating them. Dominant object to allow the amendment in the pleadings liberally is to
avoid multiplicity of proceeding to meet the speedy ends of justice. Nevertheless, one distinct
cause of action cannot be substituted for another nor the subject-matter of the suit can be
changed by means of an amendment. All rules of court are nothing but provisions intended to
secure the proper administration of justice, and it is therefore essential that they should be
made to serve and be subordinate to that purpose, so that full powers of amendment must be
enjoyed and should always be liberally exercised to meet the ends of justice, but nonetheless
no power has yet been given to enable one distinct cause of action to be substituted for
another, not to change, by means of amendment, the subject-matter of the suit. 20In the case,
State of Maharashtra v Hindustan Construction Company Ltd.21, the apex court observed that
the rules of procedure are intended to be a handmaid to the administration of justice and
promotion of justice. A party cannot be refused just relief, merely because of some mistake,
negligence, inadvertence or even infraction of the rules of procedure. The court always gives
leave to amend the pleading of a party, unless it is satisfied that the party applying was acting
mala fide, or that by his blunder, he had caused injury to his opponent which may not be
compensated for by an order of costs. However negligent or careless may have been the first
omission, and, however late the proposed amendment, the amendment may be allowed if it
can be made without injustice to the other side. The power to grant amendment of the
pleadings is intended to serve the ends of justice and is not governed by any such narrow or
technical limitations.22 Ultimately, the court exsist for doing the justice between the parties
and not for punishing them, and which they are empowered to grant amendments of the
20 State of A.P v Pioneer Builders, AIR 2007 SC 113
21 AIR 2010 SC 1299
22 Jatindra Kumar Das, Code of Civil Procedure, 4th Edition, PHI learning private limited, 2012,
Delhi, pg.285-86
17

pleadings in the larger interest of doing full and the complete justice to the parties. The
provisions for amendment of the pleadings contain to promote the ends of Justice and not for
defeating them.23
CONCLUSION
It can be concluded that the amendment of pleading is necessary to avoid the multiplicity of
civil suits. But, the court cannot grant the leave of an amendment at its whims and fancies.
There has to be certain criteria for granting or refusing the leave, which has been laid down in
above mentioned case laws. It is well known fact that delay in justice is one of the flaws of
the Indian Judiciary and amendment to pleadings is a vital reason for that.
The court must have refuse bona fide, legitimate, honest and any necessary amendments and
should never permit the mala fide amendments. Amendment of the pleadings cannot be
claimed as a matter of the right and under all circumstances, but the courts while deciding
any such prayers should not adopt any mechanical approach. The court should adopt a liberal
approach in the cases, where the other side can be compensated with costs. Normally, the
amendments are allowed if the pleadings to avoid multiplicity of litigations. Therefore, it is
for the courts to decide whether an amendment of pleading is necessary for the cause of
justice or curbing the delay. After all the basic aim of the judiciary is to strive ends of justice
so it has to maintain the balance accordingly.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books
1) Blacks Law Dictionary, 1999
2) C. K. TAKWANI, CIVIL PROCEDURE

WITH

LIMITATION ACT , 1963, 7th Edition, Eastern

book company, 2014, Lucknow.

3) D N MATHUR, THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE , 2nd Edition, Central Law Publication,
New Delhi.
4) DR. AVTAR SINGH, CODE

OF

CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE , 2nd edition, Central law

Publication, 2009, Allahabad.

23 http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/article/amendment-to-pleadings-and-the-approach-ofthe-judiciary-1427-1.html, last visited on 9th October, 2015 at 8 PM
18

5) JATINDRA KUMAR DAS, CODE

OF

CIVIL PROCEDURE , PHI learning Private Limited,

2014, Delhi
6) M.P. JAIN, THE CODE

OF

CIVIL PROCEDURE , 2nd Edition, Publishers Editorial Board,

2007, Nagpur.
7) Tandons, The code of civil procedure, 26th Edition, Allahabad Law Agency, 2005,
Haryana.
8) Shailendar Malik, code of civil procedure, 27th Edition, Allahabad Law Agency, 2011,

Delhi.
STATUTES
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
WEBLIOGRAPHY
1) http://indiankanoon.org/
2) http://www.preservearticles.com
3) www.westlawindia.com/
4) www.jdsupra.com
5) Amendment of pleadings,
http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/article/amendment-to-pleadings-and-theapproach-of-the-judiciary-1427-1.html
6) Amendment of pleadings, http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/report222.pdf.

19