1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 2723 of 2011. Date of Decision: 27.4.2011 *** Rajbir Singh .. Petitioner VS. Avtar Singh & Ors. .. Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR, Present:- Mr. Arvind Kashyap, Advocate for the petitioner. *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. The petitioner-defendant is aggrieved with the order dated 4.1.2011 vide which his application for amendment has been dismissed. Heard. It is apparent that the application has been dismissed by the trial court mainly on the ground that the amendment cannot be allowed at this stage, after the commencement of the trial. Order VI Rule 17 CPC deals with the amendment of pleadings and provides that the Court may at any stage of the proceedings allow either party to alter or amend pleadings in such a manner and on such terms as may be just and all such amendments shall be made as may be necessary for the purpose of determining the real questions in controversy between the parties. The dominant object to allow the amendment in the pleadings liberally is to avoid multiplicity of proceedings. It is equally well settled that unless serious injustice or irreparable loss is likely to be caused to the other side, the Court should adopt liberal approach and not a hyper-technical approach particularly in a case where the other side can be compensated with costs. The amendment so sought does not involve change of cause of action. The said application was filed by the defendant to incorporate the pleading of family settlement into the body of the plaint, regarding which document Ex.D6 is already on the judicial file and as pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner no evidence in respect of the aforesaid amendment 2 is to be produced. Moreover, the plaintiff-petitioner can be well compensated with costs. In view of what has been said hereinabove, the instant revision petition is allowed. The order under challenge, is quashed. The defendant is allowed to amend the written statement as prayed for, subject to payment of costs of Rs.10,000/-, which shall be paid by the petitioner to the respondent No.1-plaintiff before the Trial Court. On his doing so, the learned trial Court shall take on record the amended written statement, but without permitting the defendant to produce any further evidence and thereafter proceed with the case in accordance with law. Keeping in view the circumstances mentioned above, this petition is being disposed of without issuing any notice to the opposite party. If respondents are summoned to contest this litigation, they will have to incur huge expenses to defend this case. However, liberty is granted to the respondents that if they feel dissatisfied with this order, they may move an application to recall the same. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. (ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE April 27,2011 Jiten