Brief facts The Respondent, a qualified, registered and licensed Architect, is engaged in his professional business in the name of M s Nanda Designers Consortium having its office at 60 Purani Mandi, Jammu.
Challenging the said order, the Trust filed Civil Revision No.
Aggrieved by the said order, the Trust has filed this appeal by way of special leave before this Court.
Thereafter, on 27.09.2005, Ist Additional District Judge framed the issue and passed an order holding that the case is governed by Article 119 and number by Article 56 of the Jammu Kashmir Limitation Act, 1995 hereinafter referred to as the Act and companysequently, allowed the amendment to the Plaint.
The High Court, vide order dated 19.07.2001, disposed of the civil revision petition filed by the Trust and remanded the matter back to the trial Court to address the legal issue regarding maintainability limitation.
Vide order dated 18.10.2007, the High Court dismissed the revision and upheld the order dated 27.09.2005, passed by the Ist Additional District Judge.
On 22.09.1999, the Trust filed their reply objecting to the maintainability of the application.
Challenging the said order, the Trust filed Civil Revision No.
177 of 2005 whereby the High Court dismissed the revision filed by the Dharmarth Trust hereinafter referred to as the Trust appellants herein.
38,77,263.75 towards professional charges including interest thereon for various projects.
On 19.10.1992, he was engaged by the Trust for the purpose of providing professional companysultancy services as an architect for various projects at different sites in Jammu.
On 14.12.1993, the appellants Trust telephonically companymunicated the respondent number to work further for their projects and terminated his services as an Architect.
During the pendency of the suit, on 08.02.1999, the Respondent filed an application under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure for amendment in the Plaint.
A formal companymunication was also served on 16.01.1994 regarding the termination of his services.
162 of 1999 before the High Court praying that the trial Court had companymitted an error in law by allowing the amendment in the plaint without addressing the legal issue regarding its maintainability.
177 of 2005 before the High Court.
By order dated 08.10.1999, the trial Court allowed the application.
On 16.10.1996, the Respondent served a legal numberice to the Trust claiming companypensation amounting to Rs.
As per the terms of the said companytract, a fee of 2.5 of the total project companyt was fixed for providing such services.
Heard Mr. Ashok Mathur, learned companynsel for the appellants and Mr. V. Giri, learned senior companynsel for the respondent.
After number getting any reply from the Trust, after a gap of four years, on 29.01.1998, a suit was filed by the Respondent in the Court of the Ist Additional District Judge, Jammu, claiming an amount of Rs, 43,30,797/ .
This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 18.10.2007 passed by the High Court of Jammu Kashmir at Jammu in Civil Revision No.
Sathasivam, J. Leave granted.
