M/S. Pioneer Cement Ltd., Jauharabad vs Assistant Collector Of Sales Tax,
This matter arises from a petition seeking leave to appeal against the order of the High Court declining an amendment in the memo of a writ petition and its prayer clause. The core legal question concerns whether the amendment sought should be allowed to determine the real controversy between the parties and prevent a multiplicity of proceedings. The Supreme Court held that the amendment ought to be allowed as it facilitates the determination of the real controversy without prejudicing the opposing party, thereby advancing the ends of justice. Consequently, the petition was converted into an appeal and allowed, the impugned judgment was set aside, and the case was remanded to the High Court for a fresh decision on merits after affording the parties an opportunity of hearing. The key principle laid down is that amendments necessary for determining the real controversy and avoiding multiplicity of litigation should be permitted.
- Whether an amendment in the memo of a writ petition and prayer clause should be allowed when it determines the real controversy?
- Can an appellate court remand a matter to the High Court for a fresh decision on merits after allowing amendments?
- Does allowing an amendment to avoid multiplicity of litigation advance the ends of justice?
ORDER
MR. JUSTICE HAMID ALI MIRZA.-(1). Learned Deputy Attorney General for the respondents states that he has no objection if the disallowed amendment by the learned Judge in Chambers in the memo of writ petition and consequential' amendment in the prayer clause is allowed. We are of the opinion that amendment sought by the petitioner would determine the real controversy and it would also not prejudice the other side, so also it would avoid multiplicity of litigation and would advance the ends of justice. In the circumstances, amendments sought by the petitioner declined by the learned Judge in Chambers are allowed.
Let the petitioner file amended petition if not filed before the High Court. Learned Deputy Attorney General further submitted that in the consequence of amendments in the memo of writ petition and relief clause, it would be necessary to remand the case to the High Court, Lahore to decide the case afresh on merits in accordance with law after giving opportunity to the parties of hearing and producing material in support of their case if so desired. The learned counsel for the petitioners also concedes to the submissions made by the learned D.A.G. We find substance and merit in the submissions of learned D.A.G. Order accordingly.
2. Accordingly the petition is converted into appeal and allowed, the impugned judgment is set- aside and the same is remanded to the High Court for hearing afresh and to decide the same on merits according to law.