Pleading amendment and limitation under Order VII Rule 11 CPC: plaint disclosed a triable cause of action and no facial bar.

The plaint disclosed an existing cause of action through averments that the last payment was received on 30/10/2013, an outstanding balance remained due, and interest was claimed. On that basis, the suit filed on 25/10/2016 did not, on the face of the plaint, reveal a bar of limitation or warrant rejection under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. The proposed amendment merely added further particulars about a Company Petition and continuing cause of action, and no accrued right of the defendant was taken away because the trial court had not relied on the amended paragraph while refusing rejection of the plaint. The challenge to amendment and rejection failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the trial court erred in allowing amendment of the plaint and in rejecting the application for rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 on the grounds of ance of cause of action and limitation.

Analysis: The plaint, as originally filed, contained averments that the last payment was received on 30/10/2013 and that a specified balance remained outstanding, along with particulars of the claim and demand for interest. On that reading, the basis for the suit was already disclosed and the suit filed on 25/10/2016 did not, on the face of the plaint, disclose a bar of limitation. The proposed amendment only added further particulars regarding a Company Petition and asserted continuing cause of action. Since the trial court had not relied on the amended paragraph while refusing rejection of the plaint, no accrued right of the defendant was taken away by permitting amendment.

Conclusion: The challenge to the order allowing amendment and rejecting the application under Order VII Rule 11 failed, and the petition was dismissed.

---