AIR 2019 SUPREME COURT 1186 ::2019 (3) ADR 244 ::AIROnline 2019 SC 124 ::(2019) 1 CLR 808 (SC) ::(2019) 2 WLC(SC)CVL 86 ::(2019) 1 All RentCas 657 ::(2019) 2 RecCivR 383 ::(2019) 144 RevDec 82 ::(2019) 4 Scale 75 ::(2019) 134 All LR 285 ::(2019) 2 Cal HN 315 ::(2019) 2 All WC 1643 ::(2019) 2 ICC 176 ::(2019) 3 Mad LJ 468 ::(2019) 4 MPLJ 497 ::(2019) 6 Mah LJ 827 ::2019 (2) KCCR SN 84 (SC) ::(2019) 2 Pat LJR 66 ::(2019) 3 Raj LW 1833 ::(2019) 2 Pun LR 283 ::(2019) 4 AndhLD 54 ::(2019) 197 AllIndCas 196 (SC)

Supreme Court Of India

(From: Delhi)*

Hon'ble Judge(s): D. Y. Chandrachud, Hemant Gupta , JJ

Civil P. C. (5 of 1908) , O.6 R.17— Amendment of plaint - Counsel drafting plaint by incorrectly describing plaintiff in plaint - Error inadvertent - Cannot be refused to be corrected - Order disallowing amendment, erroneous. It is well-settled that amendment in the pleadings cannot be refused merely because of some mistake, negligence, inadvertence or even infraction of the Rules of Procedure. The Court always gives leave to amend the pleadings even if a party is negligent or careless as 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. In the present case plaint is not properly drafted in as much as in the memo of parties, the Plaintiff is described as Varun Pahwa through Director of Siddharth Garments Pvt. Ltd. though it should have been Siddharth Garments Pvt. Ltd. through its Director Varun Pahwa. It is a case of mistake of the counsel, may be on account of lack of understanding as to how a Private Limited Company is to sue in a suit for recovery of the amount advanced. The memo of parties is thus clearly inadvertent mistake on the part of the counsel who drafted @page-SC1187 the plaint. Such inadvertent mistake cannot be refused to be corrected when the mistake is apparent from the reading of the plaint. Thus, it was an in....