Variance in the notice and contents of the suit when material
Amar Nath Dogra, Appellant
Union of India, Respondent
The question now for consideration is how far and to what extent there is a variance between the plaint and the notice. At the outset, it might be pointed out that as at a very early stage of the suit the appellant withdrew the relief for a permanent injunction, which was not claimed in the notice and the question of this extra relief need not, therefore, be considered.
It would therefore be apparent from these calculations that there is a complete variance between the claim made in the notice and the claim in the plaint. We desire to make it clear that what we have here is not a case where a claim for a definite sum in the notice is later reduced in the plaint, but one where there is no possibility of establishing any relationship between the claim made in the suit and that in the notice which precedes it. On the notice she claims under one head, might for all one knows, be for an infinitesimally small sum while the other was exaggerated beyond what is found in the plaint, and hence there is no means of identifying the claim for any particular nun in the plaint with that for which a claim was being made in the notice.
There is one other aspect from which the same matter could be viewed. In the notice served by the appellant, there were several heads of claim, though they all arose out of a single contract and we consider that on a reasonable and proper construction of Section 80 of the code of Civil Procedure the authority on whom the notice is served has a right to be informed what the claim of the party is in respect of each of the several heads. It is, no doubt, true that a notice under Section 80 of the code of Civil Procedure is not a pleading and need not be a copy of the pliant and that no particular or technical form is prescribed for such a notice, still having regard to the object for which Section 80 of the code of Civil Procedure has been enacted we consider that the details which it contains should be sufficient to inform the party on whom it is served of the nature and basis of the claim and the relief sought, and in so stating the position we are merely reproducing the terms of the section.