Shri Surinder Kumar Walia vs Regional Manager, Himachal Road Transport Corporation, Dehra Depot at Dehra, Distt. Kangra, H.P. and Smt. Bishan Devi

V.K. Sharma, Judge

Heard. By way of the present revision petition u/s 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short ''CPC''), the petitioner defendant No. 2 is laying challenge against the order dated 19.10.2011 passed by the learned First Appellate Court, whereby an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC filed on behalf of the respondent No. 1-plaintiff has been allowed. Shorn of details facts of the case are that by way of an agreement of sale dated 28.3.1985 respondent No. 2 (defendant No. 1) Smt. Bishan Devi agreed to sell the land in dispute to Himachal Road Transport Corporation (in short ''HRTC'') through its Regional Manager, Dehra Depot. However, later on she sold that land to the petitioner (defendant No. 2). Accordingly, a suit for specific performance was filed by the Regional Manager, HRTC, Dehra Depot against the defendants. The suit was decreed after due contest by the defendants, who carried the matter in appeal to the learned first appellate court. It was during pendency of the appeal that the application for amendment was filed with a prayer that the nomenclature of the plaintiff, respondent No. 1 herein may be changed from ''Regional Manager, Himachal Road Transport Corporation, Dehra'' to ''Himachal Road Transport Corporation, Dehra Depot''. The prayer has been allowed. Being aggrieved defendant No. 2 is before this court in the present revision petition. According to him a grave prejudice has been caused to him as the very plaintiff has been substituted by way of an amendment and that too at the stage of the first appeal and further that in any case substitution of the plaintiff shall take effect only from the date when the amendment was allowed.

I have heard Mr. K.D. Sood, learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record.

As already observed, the agreement of sale was executed in favour of Himachal Road Transport Corporation through its Regional Manager, Dehra. Thus the suit in the very first instance ought to have been filed in the name of the said Corporation through its Regional Manager, Dehra Depot. However, it was filed in the name of the said Regional Manager. Now by amending the plaint vis-�-vis the nomenclature of the plaintiff, the aforesaid error is sought to be rectified. I have no doubt in my mind that the amendment is of a formal nature to set the record straight by incorporating the correct nomenclature of the plaintiff and is not going to cause any prejudice to the petitioner-defendant, who shall get an opportunity to file amended written statement and to raise all available defences to him. In view of the above, the petition is dismissed, so also pending application(s), if any.