Decided on January 01,2020

BHAJAN SINGH Respondents


AJAY MOHAN GOEL, J. - (1.)By way of this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners/defendants have assailed order dated 26.09.2018, passed by the Court of learned Senior Civil Judge, Court No. I, Amb in CMA No. 40/VI/2018 (Reg. No. 117/18), Civil Suit No. 169/I/2007, titled as Bhajan Singh Vs. Gulzar Singh and others, vide which, an application filed under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure by the respondent/plaintiff stands allowed by the learned Trial Court.
(2.)Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of present petition are that a suit for injunction is pending adjudication before the learned Trial Court, which has been filed by the respondent/plaintiff against the petitioners/defendants. This suit was filed in the month of October, 2007. When the Civil Suit was at the stage of hearing, an application was filed by the plaintiff before the learned Trial Court under Order VI, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure for amendment of the plaint, inter alia, on the ground that defendants had preferred an appeal against the order dated 28.02.2000, passed by the Land Reforms Officer before the Divisional Commissioner, Kangra at Dharamshala, which was pending adjudication. This fact was realized by the plaintiff when the case was being prepared for the purpose of arguments and the amendment sought for could not be incorporated in the plaint earlier erroneously and due to due to over sight. On these counts, prayer was made for permission to amend the plaint in the following terms:
"(i) That the applicant wants to add the following words "till the final decision of revenue authorities" after the word "HP" and before the word "Under Section" in the sub para (b) of the head note of the plaint as well as in prayer.

(ii) That the applicant further wants to delete the words "do so till final partition of land detailed in para (a) of the head note of the plaint in the end of para No. 4 of the plaint by adding words "take forcible possession of land as described in sub para (b) of the head note of the plaint till the decision of revenue authorities against the appeal preferred by the defendants."

(3.)This application stands allowed by the learned Trial Court vide impugned order by assigning reasons that the amendment would facilitate the adjudication of the suit and further the nature of the suit would not be changed in case the amendment was permitted to be incorporated.

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.