Hey everyone! Today, let's dive into an interesting court decision from the High Court of Delhi. It’s all about a small but important detail in a legal document. So, let’s break it down!
The case involves M/S DSI Solution Pvt. Ltd., represented by its director, Praveen Saini, and a guy named Naresh Kumar Hooda. The issue? A missing signature on a verification part in a legal document. The court had to decide if fixing this was a big deal or just a simple correction.
Naresh Kumar Hooda, the person responding to the case, filed a suit to recover money. He signed the main parts of the document but forgot to sign the verification part. This part is like a promise that everything in the document is true. So, he asked the court to let him fix this mistake.
"The respondent/plaintiff filed an application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC to rectify the error."
Praveen Saini, the person bringing the case, wasn't happy about this. He argued that since the trial had started, the rules didn’t allow for changes. But Justice Girish Kathpalia had a different view. He pointed out that the trial really starts only when the first witness speaks. Since that hadn’t happened yet, the fix was allowed.
"Mere framing of issues does not mean commencement of trial."
The court said this wasn’t a major change, just a fix for an oversight. It wasn’t about changing the facts, just making sure everything was properly signed. The Supreme Court had a similar view in a past case, so the judge followed that example.
"Verification is an adjunct to the pleadings and not a part of the substantive averments."
Justice Kathpalia didn’t find any problem with allowing the fix. He dismissed the petition and even added a cost of Rs.10,000 to be paid by Praveen Saini for bringing up the issue without merit.
"The present petition as well as the accompanying application being devoid of merit and being frivolous are dismissed with costs."
And that’s it! A small mistake, a quick fix, and a lesson in how the legal system works to ensure fairness.
