Bombay High Court
MR. PRADEEP VAKILversusTHE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- ARIF S DOCTOR
Holding
The Court held that amendment of the appeal to change the name of a respondent is permissible and cannot be opposed in the absence of any substantive objection.
Summary
The appellant, Pradeep Vakil, filed several interim applications seeking to amend three first appeals by changing the name of Respondent No. 3 (a company). The Court had earlier allowed the appellant to file an additional affidavit explaining the name change, and the respondents did not oppose the amendment. Counsel for the respondents indicated no intention to file a reply affidavit. The Court held that there was no ground to oppose the amendment and ordered that the amendments be effected within two weeks. Consequently, the interim applications were disposed of in favour of the appellant.
Issues considered
- Whether a pending first appeal may be amended to change the name of a respondent.
- Whether opposition is required to an interim application seeking such amendment.
Subjects
- Amendment of pleadings
- Interim application
- Civil Procedure Code
- Name change of party
- High Court of Bombay
Judgment
1/2 16-FA-275-2013 (C).DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
FIRST APPEAL NO. 275 OF 2013
Mr. Pradeep Vakil ...Appellant
Versus
The Regional Director,
Employees State Insurance Corporation And Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 6834 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL NO. 275 OF 2013
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 276 OF 2013
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 6833 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL NO. 276 OF 2013
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 277 OF 2013
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 6836 OF 2025
IN
FIRST APPEAL NO. 277 OF 2013
_______
Mr. Shailesh S. Pathak for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
Mr. Vishal Talsania a/w Ms. Nikita Vardhan, Ms. Vidyashree Perla i/b Kanga &
Company for the Appellant and Applicant in IA-6831/2025, 6833/2025 and
6836/2025.
_______
CORAM : ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.
DATE : 8th JANUARY, 2026
Areeb
2/2 16-FA-275-2013 (C).DOC
P.C.
1. All these Interim Applications are arising out of identical facts, by these
Interim Applications what is sought for is amendment of the respective First
Appeals in which they are filed, seeking to implead/change the name of
Respondent No.3-Company.
2. Mr Talsania has pointed out that vide an Order dated 17 th June, 2025, this
Court had permitted the Appellants to file an Additional Affidavit to place on
record the facts leading up to the change of name of Respondent No. 3, which
necessitated the amendments, which are now sought to be made to the First
Appeal, there is no opposition to this.
3. Learned counsel for the Respondent No.1 and 2 does not seek to file
Affidavit-in-Reply to oppose this Interim Application. In my view, there can be
no opposition to such an Application. Hence, Interim Applications are allowed in
terms of prayer clauses ‘a’ and ‘b’.
4. The amendments to be carried out within a period of two weeks from
today.
5. Interim Application Nos. 6833/2025, 6834/2025 and 6836/2025 are
accordingly disposed of.
[ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.]
Areeb
Checking your session…