Case Law Details
Rohit Surfactants Private Limited Vs Kanodia Salt Company Ltd (Allahabad High Court)
In Regu Mahesh (Supra), the Court while dealing with compliance of Rule 15 (2) of Order VI relying upon its earlier judgment in case of A. Sapa Vs. Singora, 1991 (3) SCC 375, held that defect in verification or an affidavit is curable. The Court also explained the difference between a curable defect and a defect continuing in the verification of affidavit without any effort being made to cure the defect.
In the present case, the mistake/defect which had occurred in the verification of the last page of the plaint was tried to be rectified by the plaintiff within few months of the institution of the suit by filing an application under Order VI Rule 17. Thus, the defect in verification is curable and the application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC is maintainable.
In Manju (Supra), the Apex Court, while dealing with an election petition, found that a defect in verification of an affidavit cannot be sufficient ground for dismissal of the petition summarily.
Thus, the Court below was not correct in recalling the order dated 08.02.2011 and rejecting the amendment application filed by the plaintiff. The defect in the verification clause was curable and was not working injustice to the other side.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
