JHUMARLAL Vs. CHHAGGAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the order dated January 5, 1991 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge No. 2, Jodhpur, by which, (he learned Additional Civil Judge dismissed the application under Order VI, Rule 17 C.P.C., filed by the defendant and refused to allow the amendments.

(2.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the order, passed by the Court below as well as the record of the case.

(3.) THE amendments, which have been sought by the learned Counsel for the defendant relates to the fact that the plaintiff, who has given the shop No. 388 to Mangilal washerman and he has taken the possession of that shop and as the possession of that shop has been taken, therefore the requirement of the plaintiff comes to an end. The plaintiff contested the application and filed the reply, to the same and denied the averments made in the application. Alongwith the reply, the plaintiff also filed an affidavit of Mst. Shanti W/o Mangilal, who has slated that they are in possession of the shop in question and are doing their business in the said shop, ft was also mentioned in the reply that the owner of the shop No. 388 sold the shop to Nazir Mohammed S/o Gulab Khan on August 5, 1988, by a registered saledeed and the plaintiff is not in possession of the shop No. 388. In the reply, though the plaintiff stated that the sale deed with respect to this shop was effected in the year 1988, but the copy of the sale -deed was not produced, which has been produced by the learned Counsel for the plaintiff in this court. He has further contended that the present application for amendment has been mode malafide with an intention to delay the proceedings and the matter has been fixed for final arguments for last more than one year but on account of the applications made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the matter could not be heard.