Tripura High CourtUnknown vs For The on 30 August, 2017Author:T. VaipheiBench:T. VaipheiCRP NO.78/2017

                          BEFORE
            THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. T. VAIPHEI

Present :
   For the petitioner     : Mr. D. Bhattacharjee, Advocate.

   For the respondents : None.30.08.2017.Heard Mr. D. Bhattacharjee, the learned counsel for
the petitioner.In view of the nature of the case projected by the
learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the view that the
revision petition can be disposed of today itself at the admission
stage without issuing notice to the respondents.The   petitioner   is   aggrieved   by   the   order     dated
28.06.2017 rejecting his application for amending the plaint. On
perusing the preceding order dated 27.06.2017, it appears that
hearing on the application for amending the plaint had not been
completed, for which time for written objection was also given to
the learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 (defendant No.1).
However, on 28.06.2017, the counsel for the petitioner was found
absent as the members of the Tripura Bar Association abstained
from work due to the death of on of their colleagues. Under the
aforesaid circumstances, the impugned order rejecting the
application was passed. The procedure adopted by the learned
Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Agartala, West Tripura (Court No.7)
does not appear to be fair and, in fact, is improper. Both the
parties should be adequately heard on the prayer for amendment
of the plaint. In fact, on 27.06.2017, the learned counsel for the
respondent No.1 was also given time to file written objection.
Apparently, even before the respondent No.1 could file the
written objection, the trial court passed the impugned order
without hearing the petitioner. This amounts to improper
exercise of jurisdiction by trial court.Consequently, this revision is allowed. The impugned
order dated 28.06.2017 is set aside. The learned Civil Judge (Jr.
Division), Agartala, West Tripura (Court No.7) is directed to hear
both the parties on the prayer for amendment and for addition ofCRP NO.78/2017                                         Page 1 of 2parties after giving the respondent No.1 an opportunity to file his
written objection and thereafter dispose of the application for
amending the plaint as well as for adding of parties in
accordance with law.The petition stands disposed of.CHIEF JUSTICECRP NO.78/2017                                     Page 2 of 2