KEYWORDS:- TRIAL OF APPEAL
- Now it is a fixed principle of law that a suit must be tried on the original cause of action and this principle governs not only the trial of suits but also appeals. Indeed the appeal being a continuation of the suit new pleas are not considered. If circumstances change they can form the subject of some other proceedings but need not ordinarily be considered in the appeal. To this proposition there are a few exceptions. Sometimes it happens that the original relief claimed becomes inappropriate, or the law changes affecting the rights of the parties. In such cases courts may allow an amendment pleading the changed circumstances. Sometimes also the changed circumstances shorten litigation and then to avoid circuity of action the courts allow an amendment. The practice of the courts is very adequately summarized in Ram Ratan Sahu vs. Mohant Sahu, (1907) 6 Cal LJ 74 Mookerjee and Holmwood JJ., have given the kind of changed circumstances which the courts usually take notice, with illustrations from decided cases. The judgment in that case has been consistently followed in India. In Raicharan Mandal vs. Biswanath Mandal, AIR 1915 Cal 103 other cases are to be found in which subsequent events were noticed. The same view was taken by the Federal Court in Lachmeshwar Prasad vs. Keshwar Lal, 1940 FCR 84 at page No. 87 following the dictum of Hughes C. J. in Patterson vs. State of Alabama, (1934) 294 US 600 at page No. 607. In Surinder Kumar vs. Gian Chand, (1958) SCR 548 this court also took subsequent events into account and approved of the case of the Federal Court. In view of these decisions it is hardly necessary to cite further authorities. [Nair Service Society Ltd. Versus K. C. Alexander and others AIR 1968 SC 1165 ]