Belated amendment of pleadings cannot introduce a fresh set-off claim based on a different cause of action.

A belated amendment of a written statement cannot be used to introduce a new and distinct set-off claim founded on a different cause of action. Where the original suit rests on a loan contract, a proposed amendment based on a pledge contract is not a mere elaboration of the existing defence but a fresh case. Such an amendment is properly refused when it would change the nature of the defence, prejudice the opposing party, and introduce a claim already barred by limitation. The governing principle is that amendment of pleadings cannot be allowed to create a new cause of action under the guise of clarification.

---

---

Issues: Whether a belated amendment of the written statement could be allowed to introduce a claim of set-off based on a different cause of action.

Analysis: The claim sought to be introduced was not a mere elaboration of the defence already pleaded, but an entirely new case founded on the contract of pledge, whereas the suit had been brought on the contract of loan. The pleaded facts did not disclose any existing claim against the Bank capable of being expanded by amendment. At the late stage when the application was made, the proposed amendment would have introduced a new claim that was otherwise barred by limitation and would have caused prejudice to the plaintiff. The principles governing amendment of pleadings do not permit the creation of a fresh cause of action under the guise of amendment, especially where the amendment would alter the nature of the defence.

Conclusion: The amendment was rightly refused, and the appellant could not be permitted to raise the set-off claim at that stage.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the refusal of amendment failed, and the appeal could not succeed on merits.

Ratio Decidendi: A belated amendment cannot be allowed where it seeks to introduce a new and distinct cause of action or claim that was not part of the original pleading and would prejudice the opposite party, particularly when the proposed claim is barred by limitation.

---