03 Regular HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CM(M) No. 239/2025 CM No. 3792/2025 Abdul Khaliq Wani ….. Petitioner (s) Through: Mr. Prince Hamza, Adv. V/s Ghulam Rasool Dar ….. Respondent(s) Through: Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Dhar, Judge ORDER 07.07.2025 1. The petitioner, through the medium of present petition, has challenged order dated 14.03.2025 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Srinagar whereby application of the respondent/plaintiff seeking amendment of the plaint to the extent of incorporation in the cheque number in para (8) of the plaint, has been allowed. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondent/plaintiff had, earlier filed an application seeking incorporation of similar amendment but the same was withdrawn by him with liberty to file fresh one and an order P a g e | 2 CM(M) No. 239/2025 CM No. 3792/2025 to this effect was passed by the learned trial court on 13.12.2024. But even prior to that, the respondent/plaintiff filed fresh application before the learned trial court on 22.09.2023 itself. On this ground, it is being contended that the respondent/plaintiff has abused process of the court. 4. Merely because respondent/plaintiff had filed application prior to grant of leave to file such application, does not mean that the respondent/plaintiff had abused process of the court. Once leave to file fresh application was granted by the learned trial court, the application filed by the respondent/plaintiff during the pendency of his application seeking withdrawal of the previous application was required to be considered by the trial court. The order granting leave to amend the plaint has admittedly been passed after 13.12.2024, meaning thereby that the application for leave to amend the plaint filed by the respondent/plaintiff was considered by the learned trial court only after leave to file fresh application was granted in his favour and not prior to that. Therefore, no illegality has been committed by the trial court. 5. The second ground urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the learned trial court by allowing the P a g e | 3 CM(M) No. 239/2025 CM No. 3792/2025 respondent/plaintiff to incorporate fresh cheque number in the plaint has, introduced a new cheque in the pleadings. 6. I am afraid the contention of the learned counsel is without any merit. What the respondent/plaintiff desires to incorporate is the correct cheque number instead of cheque number as reflected at Serial No. (8) in para No. 6 of the plaint. The respondent/plaintiff desires that instead of Cheque No. 499862, the same be read as 499872. The amendment has been sought by the respondent/plaintiff only to correct the typographical error and it does not amount to introducing a new cheque in the pleadings.. 7. For the foregoing reasons, I do not find any merit in this petition. The same is accordingly dismissed. (Sanjay Dhar) Judge SRINAGAR 07.07.2025 Aasif