Amendment of the Plaint (Part 1)

Now how can the plaint be changed? How is a suit filed? I've already given a lecture on this. In this you have both the list of documents relied upon and the list of documents produced, these two things come in. Sometimes the lawyer hasn't been able to read through all the documents, because sometimes it's the client's own fault too, in civil suits the client is often in a rush, wants the stay order immediately, immediately, immediately, the lawyer doesn't get enough time, the lawyer takes whatever documents the client verbally mentions, types up the plaint as quickly as possible, and hands it over for the stay order. Later the lawyer realizes, looking at the documents, that this ground could have been made too, that ground could have been made too. Now, since those documents are already attached to the file, you don't need to worry too much, but having the documents attached to the file doesn't mean you can contest a change in the suit's character. If a change in the suit's character is being contested at the initial stage, then you should file a fresh suit. If a change in the suit's character is not being contested, then you file an application on these grounds in court, requesting under Order 6 Rule 17, that since these documents are already part of the file, and since they are part of the file, these grounds should be allowed, these documents will have to be studied and read anyway, so these facts, which were left out of my plaint, should be allowed to be added, because this neither introduces an alternative relief nor amounts to a change in the character of the suit, there's no restriction against this. The court will allow you this relief according to the law, but if it amounts to a change in the character of the suit, or if it introduces alternative relief, the court will not allow it.

There was another practice here that used to be common but has now become harmful, in fact dangerous. Back when things weren't computerized, a suit would be filed, some mistakes would be found in it, so they'd withdraw the suit and file a fresh one. Now this can't be done anymore. Now when you file a suit, it gets fed into the computer system. When you withdraw that suit and file another one, and enter your CNIC number into the computer, your previous suit will immediately pop up. So this has become harmful, avoid this, as a lawyer avoid this, and I'm also warning clients, please, please, in civil matters give your lawyer enough time to read through the documents. After reading them, he should draft your plaint, and only after drafting it should he file it. Now what typically happens is, all these facts get included, then the written statement comes in. Sometimes in the written statement, certain documents come up that the defendant is relying on, documents you weren't aware of. Then, instead of going for an amendment, instead of filing a fresh suit, you can apply to the court for permission to file a replication, requesting an opportunity for a replication, and in it you need to satisfy the court that these documents were not within my knowledge at all, and I am establishing, prima facie, that ultimately these documents were not within my knowledge for such-and-such reasons, this is surprising to me, I want a rejoinder to this, these documents are fabricated, these documents are fake, I want to respond to this, you can file a replication.

Now, regarding amendments that don't contest a change in the suit's character and don't introduce alternative relief, let me refer you to a case law: Haji Sultan versus Shamim Akhtar, 2018 SCMR, Supreme Court Monthly Review, page 82. If you read this judgment in full as a lawyer, you'll get a complete picture regarding contesting a change in the suit's character. Now, after this, a new debate begins. What is that debate? You filed a suit, and instead of a response to your suit, an application under Order 7 Rule 11 comes in, saying, sir, this is subject to law, there is no cause of action in it, there is no court fee, the suit's valuation has not been properly done, this application comes in, requesting that this suit, this relief, be dismissed. Now you read the suit and realize what he's said under 7/11 is actually correct. Now if you go under Order 7 Rule 11 and ask, let me amend the relief, the court has to see this: if he makes this amendment, does it create a cause of action where there was none, and if this relief is currently subject to a legal bar, does making the amendment remove that legal bar? If it does remove the legal bar, the court will not allow you to amend it.