Research › Browse › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

1995 DIGILAW 905 (RAJ)

Pawan Kumar v. Purshottam Das

1995-09-22

MOHINI KAPUR

body1995
Honble KAPUR, J. – Amendment of the plaint was allowed on 31.10.1992 on payment of cost of Rs. 50/-. The amended plaint was filed on 5.11.1992 but the cost was not paid hence the defendant moved an application under Order 6 rule 18 CPC. This provision reads as under :– ``18.Failure to amend after order – If a party who has obtained an order for leave to amend does not amend accordingly within the time limited for that purpose by the order, or if no time is thereby limited then within fourteen days from the date of the order, he shall not be permitted to amend after the expiration of such limited time as aforesaid or of such fourteen days, as the case may be unless the time is extended by the Court. (2). The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that payment of costs is included in the order permitting to amend the plaint and if cost is not paid either by the time fixed by the court or within fourteen days then the party should not be permitted to amend the plaint after the expiry of period fixed by the court or after fourteen days, as the case may be, unless the time is extended by the court. (3). First of all this provision does not say that the time is limited for the payment of costs also. Secondly, the court has the power to extend the time fixed for complying with the order and in this case, when the court in discretion, has extended the time for payment of costs and the amended plaint was filed within the time then the order cannot be said to be without jurisdiction so as to call for any interference. The revision petition is, dismissed.