The Delhi High Court allowed the amendment of the application on the ground that merely because rectification proceedings have been initiated by the defendants challenging the registration of the mark in favor of the plaintiff, is no ground for not allowing the application for amendment of the plaint.
The application was allowed because not allowing the amendments would have led to unnecessary multiplicity of litigation.
The court observed that liberal views in favor of allowing amendments and allowing a party to amend the pleadings must be taken. Thus, the power of the Court to allow amendments even after the commencement of the trial, is not restricted. “There is no bar to allowing an amendment even after commencement of the trial if it is shown that despite due diligence, such amendment could not have been sought earlier,” Justice Mini Pushkarna while allowing the amendment.
Adding, “The court may allow either party to amend the pleadings if it is established that the proposed amendment is necessary for determining the real question in controversy between the parties, even if the prayer for amendment was a belated one.”
The court relied on the settled principle of law that the power to allow an amendment is wide and can be exercised at any stage of the proceedings stating that, in cases where the cause of action arose during the pendency of a suit, amendments ought to be allowed, on the condition that the same must change the basic structure of the suit, and merely changed the nature of the relief claimed.
The objective shall be to shorten the litigation and to serve the ends of justice
In the present case, the plaintiff intended to incorporate an additional relief relating to infringement, post-registration of the trademark. The plaintiff submitted that the cause of action for infringement and passing off actions are based on the same set of facts.
